Saccade latency and warning signals: Stimulus onset,offset, and change as warning events

Two experiments investigated saccade latency to a peripheral target under various warning signal conditions. In Experiment I, the effects of warning stimulus onset, change, and two offset conditions were compared at warning intervals of 0, 100, 300, and 600 msec. Warning stimulus onset, change, and offset were all effective in reducing saccade latency as compared to a no-warning control condition, but warning stimulus offset resulted in shorter saccade latency than onset or change at all warning intervals. Experiment 2 compared onset and offset warning conditions at ?300-, ?250-, ?200-, ?150-, ?100-, ?50-, 0-, and 50-msec intervals. Responses following onset were slower than those following offset at the latter five intervals, while warning onset resulted in slower saccades than no-warning control conditions at ?150-, ?100-, and ?50-msec intervals. These results indicate that the onset of a visual warning signal can have an interfering effect on the programming or execution of a saccade.