Inhibition and late errors in the antisaccade task: Influence of task design

Abstract

In the antisaccade task, subjects are instructed to saccade in the opposite direction of a peripheral visual cue (PVC). Importantly, several psychiatric disorders are associated with increased error rates in this paradigm. Despite this observation, there is no consensus about the mechanism behind antisaccade errors: while often explained as inhibition failures, some studies have suggested that errors are caused by deficits in the ability to initiate voluntary saccades. Using a computational model, we recently showed that under some conditions high latency or late errors can be explained by a race process between voluntary pro- and antisaccades. A limitation of our findings is that in our previous experiment the PVC signaled the trial type, whereas in most studies, subjects are informed about the trial type before the PVC is presented. We refer to these task designs as asynchronous (AC) and synchronous cues (SC) conditions. Here, we investigated to which extent differences in design affect the type and frequency of errors in the antisaccade task. Twenty-four subjects participated in mixed blocks of pro- and antisaccade trials in both conditions. Our results demonstrate that error rates were highly correlated across task designs and a non-negligible fraction of them were classified as late errors in both conditions. In summary, our findings indicate that errors in the AC task are the result of both inhibition failures and inaccurate voluntary action initiation.