Literature DB >> 17209740

Is the ability to identify deviations in multiple trajectories compromised by amblyopia?

Dennis M Levi1, Srimant P Tripathy.   

Abstract

Amblyopia results in a severe loss of positional information and in the ability to accurately enumerate objects (V. Sharma, D. M. Levi, & S. A. Klein, 2000). In this study, we asked whether amblyopia also disrupts the ability to track a near-threshold change in the trajectory of a single target amongst multiple similar potential targets. In the first experiment, we examined the precision for detecting a deviation in the linear motion trajectory of a dot by measuring deviation thresholds as a function of the number of moving trajectories (T). As in normal observers, we found that in both eyes of amblyopes, threshold increases steeply as T increases from 1 to 4. Surprisingly, for T = 1-4, thresholds were essentially identical in both eyes of the amblyopes and were similar to those of normal observers. In a second experiment, we measured the precision for detecting a deviation in the orientation of a static, bilinear "trajectory" by again measuring deviation thresholds (i.e., angle discrimination) as a function of the number of oriented line "trajectories" (T). Relative to the nonamblyopic eye, amblyopes show a marked threshold elevation for a static target when T = 1. However, thresholds increased with T with approximately the same slope as in their preferred eye and in the eyes of the normal controls. We conclude that while amblyopia disrupts static angle discrimination, amblyopic dynamic deviation detection thresholds are normal or very nearly so.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17209740     DOI: 10.1167/6.12.3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vis        ISSN: 1534-7362            Impact factor:   2.240


  10 in total

Review 1.  Linking assumptions in amblyopia.

Authors:  Dennis M Levi
Journal:  Vis Neurosci       Date:  2013-07-24       Impact factor: 3.241

2.  Endogenous attention improves perception in amblyopic macaques.

Authors:  Amelie Pham; Marisa Carrasco; Lynne Kiorpes
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  Sensitivity to synchronicity of biological motion in normal and amblyopic vision.

Authors:  Jennifer Y Luu; Dennis M Levi
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2013-03-06       Impact factor: 1.886

4.  Model-free estimation of the psychometric function.

Authors:  Kamila Zychaluk; David H Foster
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 2.199

5.  Image segregation in strabismic amblyopia.

Authors:  Dennis M Levi
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2007-04-17       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  Sensitivity to biological motion drops by approximately 1/2 log-unit with inversion, and is unaffected by amblyopia.

Authors:  Peter Neri; Jennifer Y Luu; Dennis M Levi
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2007-03-21       Impact factor: 1.886

7.  Misperceptions in the trajectories of objects undergoing curvilinear motion.

Authors:  Ozgur Yilmaz; Srimant P Tripathy; Haluk Ogmen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-05-17       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Covert spatial attention is functionally intact in amblyopic human adults.

Authors:  Mariel Roberts; Rachel Cymerman; R Theodore Smith; Lynne Kiorpes; Marisa Carrasco
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 2.240

9.  Suprathreshold Motion Perception in Anisometropic Amblyopia: Interocular Speed Matching and the Pulfrich Effect.

Authors:  Goro Maehara; Syunsuke Araki; Tsuyoshi Yoneda; Benjamin Thompson; Atsushi Miki
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 1.973

10.  Attention in visually typical and amblyopic children.

Authors:  Priyanka V Ramesh; Mark A Steele; Lynne Kiorpes
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2020-03-17       Impact factor: 2.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.