Literature DB >> 26562925

Monocular Versus Binocular Calibrations in Evaluating Fixation Disparity With a Video-Based Eye-Tracker.

Aiga Švede1, Elīna Treija2, Wolfgang Jaschinski3, Gunta Krūmiņa2.   

Abstract

When measuring fixation disparity (an oculomotor vergence error), the question arises as to whether a monocular or binocular calibration is more precise and physiologically more appropriate. In monocular calibrations, a single eye fixates on a calibration target that is taken as having been projected onto the center of the fovea; the corresponding vergence state represents the heterophoria (the resting vergence position), which has no effect on the calibration procedure. In binocular calibrations, a vergence error may be present and may affect the subsequent measurement of the fixation disparity during binocular recordings. This study includes a test of the precision of both monocular and binocular calibrations and an evaluation of the impact of the calibration procedure on the measurement of fixation disparity during a dot scanning task. Our results show that 11 participants (out of 19) each exhibited a significant difference in fixation disparity with the two types of calibration procedures. In addition, the fixation disparity was more strongly affected by heterophoria undergoing monocular calibration, as opposed to binocular calibration. This serves as additional evidence showing that the monocular calibration produces a physiologically more plausible fixation disparity and seems to be more appropriate for studying the full extent of fixation disparity.
© The Author(s) 2015.

Entities:  

Keywords:  calibration; eye-tracker; fixation disparity; heterophoria

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26562925     DOI: 10.1177/0301006615596886

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Perception        ISSN: 0301-0066            Impact factor:   1.490


  10 in total

1.  Binocular Eye Movements Are Adapted to the Natural Environment.

Authors:  Agostino Gibaldi; Martin S Banks
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-02-07       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Eye tracking: empirical foundations for a minimal reporting guideline.

Authors:  Kenneth Holmqvist; Saga Lee Örbom; Ignace T C Hooge; Diederick C Niehorster; Robert G Alexander; Richard Andersson; Jeroen S Benjamins; Pieter Blignaut; Anne-Marie Brouwer; Lewis L Chuang; Kirsten A Dalrymple; Denis Drieghe; Matt J Dunn; Ulrich Ettinger; Susann Fiedler; Tom Foulsham; Jos N van der Geest; Dan Witzner Hansen; Samuel B Hutton; Enkelejda Kasneci; Alan Kingstone; Paul C Knox; Ellen M Kok; Helena Lee; Joy Yeonjoo Lee; Jukka M Leppänen; Stephen Macknik; Päivi Majaranta; Susana Martinez-Conde; Antje Nuthmann; Marcus Nyström; Jacob L Orquin; Jorge Otero-Millan; Soon Young Park; Stanislav Popelka; Frank Proudlock; Frank Renkewitz; Austin Roorda; Michael Schulte-Mecklenbeck; Bonita Sharif; Frederick Shic; Mark Shovman; Mervyn G Thomas; Ward Venrooij; Raimondas Zemblys; Roy S Hessels
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2022-04-06

3.  Evaluation of the Tobii EyeX Eye tracking controller and Matlab toolkit for research.

Authors:  Agostino Gibaldi; Mauricio Vanegas; Peter J Bex; Guido Maiello
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2017-06

4.  The Active Side of Stereopsis: Fixation Strategy and Adaptation to Natural Environments.

Authors:  Agostino Gibaldi; Andrea Canessa; Silvio P Sabatini
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-03-20       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Individual objective versus subjective fixation disparity as a function of forced vergence.

Authors:  Wolfgang Jaschinski
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-07-06       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Induced vergence-accommodation conflict reduces cognitive performance in the Stroop test.

Authors:  François Daniel; Zoï Kapoula
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-02-04       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Size matters: How reaching and vergence movements are influenced by the familiar size of stereoscopically presented objects.

Authors:  Rebekka S Schubert; Maarten L Jung; Jens R Helmert; Boris M Velichkovsky; Sebastian Pannasch
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-11-20       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  The mean point of vergence is biased under projection.

Authors:  Xi Wang; Kenneth Holmqvist; Marc Alexa
Journal:  J Eye Mov Res       Date:  2019-09-09       Impact factor: 0.957

9.  An automated and objective cover test to measure heterophoria.

Authors:  Clara Mestre; Carles Otero; Fernando Díaz-Doutón; Josselin Gautier; Jaume Pujol
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Gaze tracking accuracy in humans: One eye is sometimes better than two.

Authors:  Ignace T C Hooge; Gijs A Holleman; Nina C Haukes; Roy S Hessels
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2019-12
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.