A computer-assisted test for the electrophysiological and psychophysical measurement of dynamic visual function based on motion contrast

A new test is described that allows for electrophysiological and psychophysical measurement of visual function based on motion contrast. In a computer-generated random-dot display, completely camouflaged Landolt rings become visible only when dots within the target area are moved briefly while those of the background remain stationary. Thus, detection of contours and the location of the gap in the ring rely on motion contrast (form-from-motion) instead of luminance contrast. A standard version of this test has been used to assess visual performance in relation to age, in screening professional groups (truck drivers) and in clinical groups (glaucoma patients). Aside from this standard version, the computer program easily allows for various modifications. These include the option of a synchronizing trigger signal to allow for recording of time-locked motion-onset visual-evoked responses, the reversal of target and background motion, and the displacement of random-dot targets across stationary backgrounds. In all instances, task difficulty is manipulated by changing the percentage of moving dots within the target (or background). The present test offers a short, convenient method to probe dynamic visual functions relying on surprathreshold motion-contrast stimuli and complements other routine tests of form, contrast, depth, and color vision.

[1]  K W Gish,et al.  Visual Control of Displacement at Slow Speeds , 1988, Human factors.

[2]  E. Bizzi,et al.  The Cognitive Neurosciences , 1996 .

[3]  S N Roscoe,et al.  Eye accommodation to head-up virtual images. , 1988, Human factors.

[4]  N. Mai,et al.  Selective disturbance of movement vision after bilateral brain damage. , 1983, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[5]  A. Burg Visual acuity as measured by dynamic and static tests: a comparative evaluation. , 1966, The Journal of applied psychology.

[6]  H. Barlow The neuron doctrine in perception. , 1995 .

[7]  Albert Burg VISION AND DRIVING: A SUMMARY OF RESEARCH FINDINGS , 1968 .

[8]  J. J. Koenderink,et al.  Detectability of velocity gradients in moving random-dot patterns , 1983, Vision Research.

[9]  C. Bonnet TWO SYSTEMS IN THE DETECTION OF VISUAL MOTION * , 1984, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[10]  B W van Dijk,et al.  Motion-onset visual-evoked potentials as a function of retinal eccentricity in man. , 1993, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[11]  E. Ludvigh,et al.  Study of visual acuity during the ocular pursuit of moving test objects. I. Introduction. , 1958, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[12]  M. Rouse,et al.  Dynamic visual acuity: a review. , 1981, Journal of the American Optometric Association.

[13]  D. Regan,et al.  Figure-ground segregation by motion contrast and by luminance contrast. , 1984, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[14]  M Niedeggen,et al.  Motion Aftereffects with Random-Dot Chequerboard Kinematograms: Relation between Psychophysical and VEP Measures , 1994, Perception.

[15]  J J Koenderink,et al.  Detection of coherent movement in peripherally viewed random-dot patterns. , 1983, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[16]  L. Spillmann,et al.  From Neuron to Gestalt: Mechanisms of Visual Perception , 1996 .

[17]  D Regan,et al.  Visual Acuity for Optotypes Made Visible by Relative Motion , 1990, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[18]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Intact “biological motion” and “structure from motion” perception in a patient with impaired motion mechanisms: A case study , 1990, Visual Neuroscience.

[19]  Esther Peterhans,et al.  Elements of form perception in monkey prestriate cortex , 1991 .

[20]  M. Sanders Handbook of Sensory Physiology , 1975 .

[21]  E Ludvigh,et al.  The Visibility of Moving Objects. , 1948, Science.

[22]  J. Movshon,et al.  The analysis of visual motion: a comparison of neuronal and psychophysical performance , 1992, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[23]  S. Zeki,et al.  Cerebral akinetopsia (visual motion blindness). A review. , 1991, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[24]  D. Regan,et al.  Visual processing of motion-defined form: selective failure in patients with parietotemporal lesions , 1992, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.