Supp Supp Two 21—
expe the arran poin cross same eye f targe
plementar plementar o‐choice re
—45, mean
eriment. A start posi nged butto nt between
s was prese e as in the fixation fo et jumped
ry data ry Figure S
action exp age ± SD
response ition in th
ons. At the n the two b
ented on th main expe r 700 ms. T
9.6 cm to S1.
periment. A D; 32.6 ±
box was p he main e e start of t buttons wit he monitor eriment), an Then, after
the right (
A: Eight p 6.9) parti
placed on t experimen the trial, t th an inde r (Their siz nd the par r some dur (32/96 trial
people (5 icipated in the digitize
t. The bo the particip ex finger. T ze, location rticipants w
ration (295 ls) or left (
male and
n a two‐c er at the sa x had tw pants touc The target n, and lumi were requir
, 365, 435, (32/96 trial
3 female,
choice rea ame locatio wo horizon ched the ce
with a fix inance wer red to main
or 505 ms ls) in rando
1
age;
action on as ntally enter ation re the ntain ), the omly
2
selected trials. In the remaining trials (32/96 trials), the target was not jumped.
When the target jumped, the participants were asked to indicate the direction of the jump by pressing the right or left button as quickly as possible. As in the main experiment, this finger‐reaction task was conducted with a saccade (SAC condition shown in the left panel) or with fixation (FIX condition shown in the right panel).
B: We analyzed the finger acceleration in the target jump trials. We used the same method for detecting reaction latency as in the main experiment. The result showed that the effect of the gaze condition on the finger reaction time was completely opposite to that observed in the main experiment. In this experiment, the saccade did not accelerate but rather slowed the finger reaction. This means that finger movement with a saccade was significantly slower than that with fixation [paired T‐test, T(7) = ‐2.55, p < 0.05, ES = 0.90, Power = 0.59].
