Russell L Woods1, Premnandhini Satgunam. 1. Schepens Eye Research Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. russell.woods@schepens.harvard.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: To survey the viewing experience (e.g. hours watched, difficulty) and viewing metrics (e.g. distance viewed, display size) for television (TV), computers and portable visual display devices for normally-sighted (NS) and visually impaired participants. This information may guide visual rehabilitation. METHODS: Survey was administered either in person or in a telephone interview on 223 participants of whom 104 had low vision (LV, worse than 6/18, age 22-90 years, 54 males), and 94 were NS (visual acuity 6/9 or better, age 20-86 years, 50 males). Depending on their situation, NS participants answered up to 38 questions and LV participants answered up to a further 10 questions. RESULTS: Many LV participants reported at least 'some' difficulty watching TV (71/103), reported at least 'often' having difficulty with computer displays (40/76) and extreme difficulty watching videos on handheld devices (11/16). The average daily TV viewing was slightly, but not significantly, higher for the LV participants (3.6 h) than the NS (3.0 h). Only 18% of LV participants used visual aids (all optical) to watch TV. Most LV participants obtained effective magnification from a reduced viewing distance for both TV and computer display. Younger LV participants also used a larger display when compared to older LV participants to obtain increased magnification. About half of the TV viewing time occurred in the absence of a companion for both the LV and the NS participants. The mean number of TVs at home reported by LV participants (2.2) was slightly but not significantly (p = 0.09) higher than NS participants (2.0). LV participants were equally likely to have a computer but were significantly (p = 0.004) less likely to access the internet (73/104) compared to NS participants (82/94). Most LV participants expressed an interest in image enhancing technology for TV viewing (67/104) and for computer use (50/74), if they used a computer. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, both NS and LV participants had comparable video viewing habits. Most LV participants in our sample reported difficulty watching TV, and indicated an interest in assistive technology, such as image enhancement. As our participants reported that at least half their video viewing hours are spent alone and that there is usually more than one TV per household, this suggests that there are opportunities to use image enhancement on the TVs of LV viewers without interfering with the viewing experience of NS viewers.
PURPOSE: To survey the viewing experience (e.g. hours watched, difficulty) and viewing metrics (e.g. distance viewed, display size) for television (TV), computers and portable visual display devices for normally-sighted (NS) and visually impaired participants. This information may guide visual rehabilitation. METHODS: Survey was administered either in person or in a telephone interview on 223 participants of whom 104 had low vision (LV, worse than 6/18, age 22-90 years, 54 males), and 94 were NS (visual acuity 6/9 or better, age 20-86 years, 50 males). Depending on their situation, NSparticipants answered up to 38 questions and LV participants answered up to a further 10 questions. RESULTS: Many LV participants reported at least 'some' difficulty watching TV (71/103), reported at least 'often' having difficulty with computer displays (40/76) and extreme difficulty watching videos on handheld devices (11/16). The average daily TV viewing was slightly, but not significantly, higher for the LV participants (3.6 h) than the NS (3.0 h). Only 18% of LV participants used visual aids (all optical) to watch TV. Most LV participants obtained effective magnification from a reduced viewing distance for both TV and computer display. Younger LV participants also used a larger display when compared to older LV participants to obtain increased magnification. About half of the TV viewing time occurred in the absence of a companion for both the LV and the NSparticipants. The mean number of TVs at home reported by LV participants (2.2) was slightly but not significantly (p = 0.09) higher than NSparticipants (2.0). LV participants were equally likely to have a computer but were significantly (p = 0.004) less likely to access the internet (73/104) compared to NSparticipants (82/94). Most LV participants expressed an interest in image enhancing technology for TV viewing (67/104) and for computer use (50/74), if they used a computer. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, both NS and LV participants had comparable video viewing habits. Most LV participants in our sample reported difficulty watching TV, and indicated an interest in assistive technology, such as image enhancement. As our participants reported that at least half their video viewing hours are spent alone and that there is usually more than one TV per household, this suggests that there are opportunities to use image enhancement on the TVs of LV viewers without interfering with the viewing experience of NS viewers.
Authors: Serge Resnikoff; Donatella Pascolini; Daniel Etya'ale; Ivo Kocur; Ramachandra Pararajasegaram; Gopal P Pokharel; Silvio P Mariotti Journal: Bull World Health Organ Date: 2004-12-14 Impact factor: 9.408
Authors: David S Friedman; Benita J O'Colmain; Beatriz Muñoz; Sandra C Tomany; Cathy McCarty; Paulus T V M de Jong; Barbara Nemesure; Paul Mitchell; John Kempen Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2004-04
Authors: Eli Peli; Jeonghoon Kim; Yitzhak Yitzhaky; Robert B Goldstein; Russell L Woods Journal: J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 2.129
Authors: Matthew Fullerton; Russell L Woods; Fuensanta A Vera-Diaz; Eli Peli Journal: J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 2.129
Authors: Premnandhini Satgunam; Russell L Woods; Gang Luo; P Matthew Bronstad; Zachary Reynolds; Chaithanya Ramachandra; Bartlett W Mel; Eli Peli Journal: Optom Vis Sci Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 1.973
Authors: Francisco M Costela; Daniel R Saunders; Sidika Kajtezovic; Dylan J Rose; Russell L Woods Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2018-08-16 Impact factor: 3.283