-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Severe visual field constriction (tunnel vision) impairs the ability to navigate and walk safely. We evaluated Trifield glasses as a mobility rehabilitation device for tunnel vision in an extended wearing trial. Twelve patients with tunnel vision (5-22 degrees wide) due to retinitis pigmentosa or choroideremia participated in the 5-visit wearing trial. To expand the horizontal visual field, one spectacle lens was fitted with two apex-to-apex prisms that vertically bisected the pupil on primary gaze. This provides visual field expansion at the expense of visual confusion (two objects with the same visual direction). Patients were asked to wear these spectacles as much as possible for the duration of the wearing trial (median 8, range 6-60 weeks). Clinical success (continued wear, indicating perceived overall benefit), visual field expansion, perceived direction and perceived visual ability were measured. Of 12 patients, nine chose to continue wearing the Trifield glasses at the end of the wearing trial. Of those nine patients, at long-term follow-up (35-78 weeks), three reported still wearing the Trifield glasses. Visual field expansion (median 18, range 9-38 degrees) was demonstrated for all patients. No patient demonstrated adaptation to the change in visual direction produced by the Trifield glasses (prisms). For reported difficulty with obstacles, some differences between successful and non-successful wearers were found. Trifield glasses provided reported benefits in obstacle avoidance to 7 of the 12 patients completing the wearing trial. Crowded environments were particularly difficult for most wearers. Possible reasons for long-term discontinuation and lack of adaptation to perceived direction are discussed.
Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics 05/2010; 30(3):240-52. · 1.58 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Psychophysicists use spatial or temporal two-alternative forced-choice (2AFC) paradigms interchangeably. Thus, experiments with the same general goal are carried out using one or the other paradigm by distinct or even the same research groups. For example, this situation has occurred both in studies on visual sensitivity in dyslexia and in studies on lateral interactions in peripheral vision. Conflicting results in either field (e.g. whether or not dyslexics have a visual deficit and whether or not peripheral detection is facilitated by the presence of flankers) appear to be resolved on the surmise that spatial and temporal 2AFC paradigms indeed produce different results. We designed experiments in which peripheral detection thresholds for Gabor patches (in the presence or absence of suprathreshold flankers) could be measured using completely equivalent spatial and temporal 2AFC paradigms so that any resultant difference can be unequivocally attributed to the effect of the paradigms themselves. The results showed that spatial 2AFC renders significantly lower sensitivity than temporal 2AFC when the target is presented along with suprathreshold flankers, but about the same sensitivity as temporal 2AFC when the target is presented alone. In the end, this resulted in statistically significant facilitation in peripheral vision only when measured with temporal 2AFC. Separate experiments at each of several peripheral locations revealed that the presence and magnitude of this effect varies not only with psychophysical paradigm but also with retinal locus.
Spatial Vision 02/2005; 18(1):99-127. · 1.04 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Foveal detection of a Gabor patch (target) is facilitated by collinear, displaced high-contrast flankers. Polat and Sagi reported that the same phenomenon occurred in the periphery, but no data were presented [Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 91 (1994) 1206]. Others have found no facilitation in a limited number of conditions tested. To resolve this apparent conflict, we measured lateral facilitation in the near-periphery using a range of stimulus parameters. We found facilitation for a range of target-flanker distances for peripheral eccentricities up to 6 degrees , but the magnitude of the effect was less than found in central vision. Facilitation varied across subjects and with spatial frequency. Flanker contrast had no effect over the range evaluated (10-80%). Equal facilitation was found for two global arrangements of the stimulus pattern. Facilitation was found using a temporal, but not a spatial two-alternative forced-choice paradigm, accounting for the different results among previous studies. This finding supports previous indications of the role of attention in altering such facilitation. The value of facilitation from lateral interactions for persons with central vision impairment, who have to shift their attention to a peripheral locus constantly, needs to be examined.
Vision Research 01/2005; 44(27):3193-202. · 2.41 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This article describes a system for tracking the line of primary gaze (LoPG) of participants as they view a large projection screen. Using a magnetic head tracker and a tracking algorithm, we find the onscreen location at which a participant is pointing a head-mounted crosshair. The algorithm presented for tracking the LoPG uses a polynomial function to correct for distortion in magnetic tracker readings, a geometric model for computing LoPG from corrected tracker measurements, and a method for finding the intersection of the LoPG with the screen. Calibration techniques for the above methods are presented. The results of two experiments validating the algorithm and calibration methods are also reported. Experiments showed an improvement in accuracy of LoPG tracking provided by each of the two presented calibration steps, yielding errors in LoPG measurements of less than 2 degrees over a wide range of head positions. Source code for the described algorithms can be downloaded from the Psychonomic Society Web archive, http://www.psychonomic.org/archive/.
Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers: a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc 12/2004; 36(4):757-70.
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: this paper examines. The second question, namely, which of the paradigms (if any) portrays the actual threshold, is more relevant but also more difficult to address, and it may well be that the attentional and memory load that spatial versus temporal paradigms demand make each of them unsuitable for addressing distinct subsets of research topics. In any case, the reasons that this second question escapes examination are that (1) empirically, we cannot collect dependable data that would allow a comparison with "true threshold" because all of our measured thresholds are suspect in these conditions and (2) formally, simulations cannot be carried out to address the issue in the absence of dependable and detailed quantitative knowledge of the particular effects of attention and memory (in spatial versus temporal presentations) on visual performance. Yet, the issue may be irrelevant from a practical point of view as long as thresholds obtained in spatial versus temporal paradigms keep a constant relation to each other and results obtained with spatial versus temporal paradigms in the same or different studies are not compared except to arrive at conclusions regarding differences in the outcomes of each paradigm. Since observing the latter admonition is entirely in the hands of practicing psychophysicists, the work reported in this paper set out to document the relation between thresholds obtained in identical conditions except for the spatial versus temporal arrangement of the 2AFC paradigm
04/2004;
