@inproceedings{OhlBrandtKliegl2013,
  author    = {Ohl, Sven and Brandt, S. and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {Immediate preparatory influences on microsaccades before saccade onset to endogenously vs. exogenously defined targets},
  series = {Perception},
  volume    = {42},
  booktitle = {Perception},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {Sage Publ.},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0301-0066},
  pages     = {37 -- 38},
  year      = {2013},
  language  = {en}
}
@inproceedings{OhlBrandtKliegl2012,
  author    = {Ohl, Sven and Brandt, S. and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {Post-saccadic location judgments after presentation of multiple target-like objects},
  series = {Perception},
  volume    = {41},
  booktitle = {Perception},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Sage Publ.},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0301-0066},
  pages     = {171 -- 171},
  year      = {2012},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{OberauerWendlandKliegl2003,
  author    = {Oberauer, Klaus and Wendland, Mirko and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {Age differences in working memory : the roles of storage and selective access},
  year      = {2003},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{OberauerKliegl2010,
  author    = {Oberauer, Klaus and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {Interferenz im Arbeitsged{\"a}chtnis : ein formales Modell},
  issn      = {0033-3042},
  doi       = {10.1026/0033-3042/a000008},
  year      = {2010},
  language  = {de}
}
@article{OberauerKliegl2004,
  author    = {Oberauer, Klaus and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {Simultaneous cognitive operations in working memory after dual-task practice},
  issn      = {0096-1523},
  year      = {2004},
  abstract  = {The authors tested the hypothesis that with adequate practice, people can execute 2 cognitive operations in working memory simultaneously. In Experiment 1, 6 students practiced updating 2 items in working memory through 2 sequences of operations (1 numerical, 1 spatial). In different blocks, imperative stimuli for the 2 sequences of operations were presented either simultaneously or sequentially. Initially, most participants experienced substantial dual-task costs. After 24 sessions of practice, operation latencies for simultaneous presentation were equal to the maximum of times for the 2 operations in the sequential condition, suggesting perfect timesharing. Experiment 2 showed that a reduction of dual-task costs requires practice on the combination of the 2 updating tasks, not just practice on each individual task. Hence, the reduction of dual-task costs cannot be explained by shortening or automatization of individual operations},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{OberauerKliegl2001,
  author    = {Oberauer, Klaus and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {Beyond resources : formal models of complexity effects in age differences in working memory},
  year      = {2001},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{OberauerKliegl2006,
  author    = {Oberauer, Klaus and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {A formal model of capacity limits in working memory},
  series = {Journal of Memory and Language},
  volume    = {55},
  journal   = {Journal of Memory and Language},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {0749-596X},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.jml.2006.08.009},
  pages     = {601 -- 626},
  year      = {2006},
  abstract  = {A mathematical model of working-memory capacity limits is proposed on the key assumption of mutual interference between items in working memory. Interference is assumed to arise from overwriting of features shared by these items. The model was fit to time-accuracy data of memory-updating tasks from four experiments using nonlinear mixed effect (NLME) models as a framework. The model gave a good account of the data from a numerical and a spatial task version. The performance pattern in a combination of numerical and spatial updating could be explained by variations in the interference parameter: assuming less feature overlap between contents from different domains than between contents from the same domain, the model can account for double dissociations of content domains in dual-task experiments. Experiment 3 extended this idea to similarity within the verbal domain. The decline of memory accuracy with increasing memory load was steeper with phonologically similar than with dissimilar material, although processing speed was faster for the similar material. The model captured the similarity effects with a higher estimated interference parameter for the similar than for the dissimilar condition. The results are difficult to explain with alternative models, in particular models incorporating time-based decay and models assuming limited resource pools.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{OberauerDemmrichMayretal.2001,
  author    = {Oberauer, Klaus and Demmrich, Anke and Mayr, Ulrich and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {Dissociating retention and access in working memory : an age-comparative study of mental arithmetic},
  year      = {2001},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{NuthmannVituEngbertetal.2015,
  author    = {Nuthmann, Antje and Vitu, Fran{\c{c}}oise and Engbert, Ralf and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {No evidence for a saccadic range effect for visually guided and memory-guided saccades in simple saccade-targeting tasks},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {506},
  issn      = {1866-8364},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-41163},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-411639},
  pages     = {27},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {Saccades to single targets in peripheral vision are typically characterized by an undershoot bias. Putting this bias to a test, Kapoula [1] used a paradigm in which observers were presented with two different sets of target eccentricities that partially overlapped each other. Her data were suggestive of a saccadic range effect (SRE): There was a tendency for saccades to overshoot close targets and undershoot far targets in a block, suggesting that there was a response bias towards the center of eccentricities in a given block. Our Experiment 1 was a close replication of the original study by Kapoula [1]. In addition, we tested whether the SRE is sensitive to top-down requirements associated with the task, and we also varied the target presentation duration. In Experiments 1 and 2, we expected to replicate the SRE for a visual discrimination task. The simple visual saccade-targeting task in Experiment 3, entailing minimal top-down influence, was expected to elicit a weaker SRE. Voluntary saccades to remembered target locations in Experiment 3 were expected to elicit the strongest SRE. Contrary to these predictions, we did not observe a SRE in any of the tasks. Our findings complement the results reported by Gillen et al. [2] who failed to find the effect in a saccade-targeting task with a very brief target presentation. Together, these results suggest that unlike arm movements, saccadic eye movements are not biased towards making saccades of a constant, optimal amplitude for the task.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{NuthmannVituEngbertetal.2016,
  author    = {Nuthmann, Antje and Vitu, Francoise and Engbert, Ralf and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {No Evidence for a Saccadic Range Effect for Visually Guided and Memory-Guided Saccades in Simple Saccade-Targeting Tasks},
  series = {PLoS one},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {PLoS one},
  publisher = {PLoS},
  address   = {San Fransisco},
  issn      = {1932-6203},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0162449},
  pages     = {9935 -- 9943},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Saccades to single targets in peripheral vision are typically characterized by an undershoot bias. Putting this bias to a test, Kapoula [1] used a paradigm in which observers were presented with two different sets of target eccentricities that partially overlapped each other. Her data were suggestive of a saccadic range effect (SRE): There was a tendency for saccades to overshoot close targets and undershoot far targets in a block, suggesting that there was a response bias towards the center of eccentricities in a given block. Our Experiment 1 was a close replication of the original study by Kapoula [1]. In addition, we tested whether the SRE is sensitive to top-down requirements associated with the task, and we also varied the target presentation duration. In Experiments 1 and 2, we expected to replicate the SRE for a visual discrimination task. The simple visual saccade-targeting task in Experiment 3, entailing minimal top-down influence, was expected to elicit a weaker SRE. Voluntary saccades to remembered target locations in Experiment 3 were expected to elicit the strongest SRE. Contrary to these predictions, we did not observe a SRE in any of the tasks. Our findings complement the results reported by Gillen et al. [2] who failed to find the effect in a saccade-targeting task with a very brief target presentation. Together, these results suggest that unlike arm movements, saccadic eye movements are not biased towards making saccades of a constant, optimal amplitude for the task.},
  language  = {en}
}