A paradigm for characterizing motion misperception in people with typical vision and low vision.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY Optometry and Vision Science Pub Date : 2024-05-01 DOI:10.1097/OPX.0000000000002139
Benjamin M Chin, Minqi Wang, Loganne T Mikkelsen, Clara T Friedman, Cherlyn J Ng, Marlena A Chu, Emily A Cooper
{"title":"A paradigm for characterizing motion misperception in people with typical vision and low vision.","authors":"Benjamin M Chin, Minqi Wang, Loganne T Mikkelsen, Clara T Friedman, Cherlyn J Ng, Marlena A Chu, Emily A Cooper","doi":"10.1097/OPX.0000000000002139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We aimed to develop a paradigm that can efficiently characterize motion percepts in people with low vision and compare their responses with well-known misperceptions made by people with typical vision when targets are hard to see.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We recruited a small cohort of individuals with reduced acuity and contrast sensitivity (n = 5) as well as a comparison cohort with typical vision (n = 5) to complete a psychophysical study. Study participants were asked to judge the motion direction of a tilted rhombus that was either high or low contrast. In a series of trials, the rhombus oscillated vertically, horizontally, or diagonally. Participants indicated the perceived motion direction using a number wheel with 12 possible directions, and statistical tests were used to examine response biases.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All participants with typical vision showed systematic misperceptions well predicted by a Bayesian inference model. Specifically, their perception of vertical or horizontal motion was biased toward directions orthogonal to the long axis of the rhombus. They had larger biases for hard-to-see (low contrast) stimuli. Two participants with low vision had a similar bias, but with no difference between high- and low-contrast stimuli. The other participants with low vision were unbiased in their percepts or biased in the opposite direction.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results suggest that some people with low vision may misperceive motion in a systematic way similar to people with typical vision. However, we observed large individual differences. Future work will aim to uncover reasons for such differences and identify aspects of vision that predict susceptibility.</p>","PeriodicalId":19649,"journal":{"name":"Optometry and Vision Science","volume":"101 5","pages":"252-262"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Optometry and Vision Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000002139","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: We aimed to develop a paradigm that can efficiently characterize motion percepts in people with low vision and compare their responses with well-known misperceptions made by people with typical vision when targets are hard to see.

Methods: We recruited a small cohort of individuals with reduced acuity and contrast sensitivity (n = 5) as well as a comparison cohort with typical vision (n = 5) to complete a psychophysical study. Study participants were asked to judge the motion direction of a tilted rhombus that was either high or low contrast. In a series of trials, the rhombus oscillated vertically, horizontally, or diagonally. Participants indicated the perceived motion direction using a number wheel with 12 possible directions, and statistical tests were used to examine response biases.

Results: All participants with typical vision showed systematic misperceptions well predicted by a Bayesian inference model. Specifically, their perception of vertical or horizontal motion was biased toward directions orthogonal to the long axis of the rhombus. They had larger biases for hard-to-see (low contrast) stimuli. Two participants with low vision had a similar bias, but with no difference between high- and low-contrast stimuli. The other participants with low vision were unbiased in their percepts or biased in the opposite direction.

Conclusions: Our results suggest that some people with low vision may misperceive motion in a systematic way similar to people with typical vision. However, we observed large individual differences. Future work will aim to uncover reasons for such differences and identify aspects of vision that predict susceptibility.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
典型视力者和低视力者的运动错觉特征范例。
目的:我们旨在开发一种范式,它能有效地描述低视力者的运动知觉,并将他们的反应与典型视力者在目标难以看清时所产生的众所周知的错误知觉进行比较:我们招募了一小群视力和对比敏感度下降的个体(n = 5)和一小群视力正常的对比个体(n = 5)来完成一项心理物理研究。研究者被要求判断一个高或低对比度倾斜菱形的运动方向。在一系列试验中,菱形垂直、水平或斜向摆动。受试者使用一个有 12 个可能方向的数字轮来指示所感知的运动方向,并使用统计检验来检查反应偏差:结果:所有具有典型视力的参与者都表现出了系统性的错误感知,而贝叶斯推理模型可以很好地预测这种错误感知。具体来说,他们对垂直或水平运动的感知偏向于与菱形长轴正交的方向。对于难以观察(低对比度)的刺激物,他们的偏差更大。两名视力低下的参与者也有类似的偏差,但在高对比度和低对比度的刺激物之间没有差异。其他低视力者的感知没有偏差或偏差方向相反:我们的研究结果表明,一些低视力者可能会以一种类似于典型视力者的系统方式错误感知运动。然而,我们观察到了巨大的个体差异。未来的工作将致力于揭示造成这种差异的原因,并找出预测易感性的视觉因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Optometry and Vision Science
Optometry and Vision Science 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
7.10%
发文量
210
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Optometry and Vision Science is the monthly peer-reviewed scientific publication of the American Academy of Optometry, publishing original research since 1924. Optometry and Vision Science is an internationally recognized source for education and information on current discoveries in optometry, physiological optics, vision science, and related fields. The journal considers original contributions that advance clinical practice, vision science, and public health. Authors should remember that the journal reaches readers worldwide and their submissions should be relevant and of interest to a broad audience. Topical priorities include, but are not limited to: clinical and laboratory research, evidence-based reviews, contact lenses, ocular growth and refractive error development, eye movements, visual function and perception, biology of the eye and ocular disease, epidemiology and public health, biomedical optics and instrumentation, novel and important clinical observations and treatments, and optometric education.
期刊最新文献
Case report: Acute macular neuroretinopathy post-COVID-19 infection. Exploring cognitive overload in adults with visual impairment: The association between concentration and fatigue. A pilot study of the impact of repeated blink refrainment on ocular surface temperature and the interblink period. Extended release of ciprofloxacin from commercial silicone-hydrogel and conventional hydrogel contact lenses containing vitamin E diffusion barriers. Efficacy comparison of repeated low-level red-light therapy and orthokeratology lenses for myopia control.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1