Fixation Task: A Simple Eye Movement Task Reveals an Impairment in Schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fixation stability (FS) is a basic substrate of visuomotor processing that can be assessed by tracking eye movements during a simple, easy-to-perform task of gazing at a visual stimulus. We studied FS with and without distractors for its potential as an endophenotype marker in antipsychotic-naïve/free schizophrenia (SCZ), SCZ first-degree relatives (FDRs), and healthy controls (HC). METHOD: Monocular high-frequency eye tracking data were recorded during a fixation stability task in 69 antipsychotic-naïve/free SCZ, 49 FDRs, and 76 HCs. The task required maintenance of gaze on a central circular target while ignoring an identical peripheral distractor, when present, at near/farther distances on either side. Fixation stability across the groups and the effect of laterality and distance of the distractor effect were analyzed using ANCOVA and RMANCOVA. RESULT: SCZ had significantly higher fixation frequency, saccade amplitude, and scanpath length compared to the other groups, even in trials without distractors (ηp2 = 0.05-0.07). Introducing distractors resulted in further worsening of performance in SCZ (ηp2 = 0.09-0.23). First-degree relatives showed impairment in median fixation duration (ηp2 = 0.13). Higher saccade amplitudes and scanpath lengths (both ηp2 = 0.09) were noted in trials with farther distractors across the groups. A significant interaction effect of the laterality * group was noted on scanpath length (ηp2 = 0.03). DISCUSSION: FS impairment was noted in antipsychotic naïve/free SCZ, and it worsened with the introduction of distractors. An inversed laterality effect (rightward-bias) of distractor was noted in SCZ and their FDRs, suggesting a possible association of attenuation/reversal of visual functional asymmetry with SCZ vulnerability. Future studies should evaluate FS as illness markers across different clinical stages.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".