**Preprocessing.** Task performance will be analyzed offline. Trials will be included for analysis, if: - fixation control is passed. - the saccade is successfully detected and the eye crossed the boundary around the initial target location (i.e., target area). - the saccade is not falsely detected online. - there are no blinks during saccade flight. - the stimulus movement (as indicated by trial timestamps) is concluded before saccade offset. - there were no dropped frames during the movement of the stimulus - a saccade is successfully detected offline. - the participant made one saccade (rather than two or more) in order to reach the target location. Trials are repeated during the experiment in case fixations were not passed or saccades were not executed properly. In addition, participants may be excluded from the analysis in case their understanding of the task was wrong or if too few trials could be collected, e.g., due to insufficient calibration, or an inability to accurate saccades. At least half of the planned trials will have to be completed and valid to justify the inclusion of the participant's data. **Analyses.** As dependent variables we will analyze proportions of secondary and tertiary saccades to post-saccadic stimulus locations, as well as secondary and tertiary saccade latencies. - Saccades will be detected offline using the Engbert-Kliegl algorithm (Engbert & Kliegl, 2003; Engbert & Mergenthaler, 2006). Whether secondary or tertiary saccades were made to which post-saccadic location (original stimulus vs distractor) will be assessed based on two criteria, i.e., whether the end point of the detected saccade falls into the region of interest (e.g., a circular area of 2 dva radius around the stimulus) and (2) the saccade direction, computed by start and end points of the saccade. - Proportion of 'correct' secondary saccades (that is that a secondary saccade was made to the original pre-saccadic stimulus) will be computed by the ratio of the number of saccades made to the correct location relative to the number of saccades made to the incorrect location (given there was any target displacement). Secondary saccade latencies will be defined as the subtraction of the time of onset of the secondary saccade by the offset of the primary saccade. In trials, in which no target displacement takes place, we will analyze the proportion of secondary saccades anyway (e.g., corrective saccades when undershooting during the first saccade), as motion streaks may still have an effect in the absence of intra-saccadic stimulus movement. - Dependent variables will be analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVAs, as well as using general linear mixed-effects models (Bates et al., 2007; Moscatelli et al., 2012). Individual paired t-tests with the appropriate corrections for repeated testing may be used to compare individual conditions. - We will extract specific stimulus features (such as components of spatial frequency and orientation) from the noise patch matrices to perform reverse-correlation analyses (e.g., Wyart et al., 2012; Li et al., 2016), estimate metrics of streak visibility and analyze potential effects of streak visibility on the dependent variables. **References** Bates, D., Sarkar, D., Bates, M. D., & Matrix, L. (2007). The lme4 package. R package version, 2(1), 74. Engbert, R., & Kliegl, R. (2003). Microsaccades uncover the orientation of covert attention. Vision research, 43(9), 1035-1045. Engbert, R., & Mergenthaler, K. (2006). Microsaccades are triggered by low retinal image slip. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(18), 7192-7197. Li, H. H., Barbot, A., & Carrasco, M. (2016). Saccade preparation reshapes sensory tuning. Current Biology, 26(12), 1564-1570. Moscatelli, A., Mezzetti, M., & Lacquaniti, F. (2012). Modeling psychophysical data at the population-level: the generalized linear mixed model. Journal of vision, 12(11), 26-26. Wyart, V., Nobre, A. C., & Summerfield, C. (2012). Dissociable prior influences of signal probability and relevance on visual contrast sensitivity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(9), 3593–3598.