Cargando…
Psychophysical Tests Do Not Identify Ocular Dominance Consistently
Classical sighting or sensory tests are used in clinical practice to identify the dominant eye. Several psychophysical tests were recently proposed to quantify the magnitude of dominance but whether their results agree was never investigated. We addressed this question for the two most common psycho...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6492369/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31069044 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2041669519841397 |
_version_ | 1783415130708508672 |
---|---|
author | García-Pérez, Miguel A. Peli, Eli |
author_facet | García-Pérez, Miguel A. Peli, Eli |
author_sort | García-Pérez, Miguel A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Classical sighting or sensory tests are used in clinical practice to identify the dominant eye. Several psychophysical tests were recently proposed to quantify the magnitude of dominance but whether their results agree was never investigated. We addressed this question for the two most common psychophysical tests: The perceived-phase test, which measures the cyclopean appearance of dichoptically presented sinusoids of different phase, and the coherence-threshold test, which measures interocular differences in motion perception when signal and noise stimuli are presented dichoptically. We also checked for agreement with three classical tests (Worth 4-dot, Randot suppression, and Bagolini lenses). Psychophysical tests were administered in their conventional form and also using more dependable psychophysical methods. The results showed weak correlations between psychophysical measures of strength of dominance with inconsistent identification of the dominant eye across tests: Agreement on left-eye dominance, right-eye dominance, or nondominance by both tests occurred only for 11 of 40 observers (27.5%); the remaining 29 observers were classified differently by each test, including 14 cases (35%) of opposite classification (left-eye dominance by one test and right-eye dominance by the other). Classical tests also yielded conflicting results that did not agree well with classification based on psychophysical tests. The results are discussed in the context of determination of ocular dominance for clinical decisions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6492369 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64923692019-05-08 Psychophysical Tests Do Not Identify Ocular Dominance Consistently García-Pérez, Miguel A. Peli, Eli Iperception Article Classical sighting or sensory tests are used in clinical practice to identify the dominant eye. Several psychophysical tests were recently proposed to quantify the magnitude of dominance but whether their results agree was never investigated. We addressed this question for the two most common psychophysical tests: The perceived-phase test, which measures the cyclopean appearance of dichoptically presented sinusoids of different phase, and the coherence-threshold test, which measures interocular differences in motion perception when signal and noise stimuli are presented dichoptically. We also checked for agreement with three classical tests (Worth 4-dot, Randot suppression, and Bagolini lenses). Psychophysical tests were administered in their conventional form and also using more dependable psychophysical methods. The results showed weak correlations between psychophysical measures of strength of dominance with inconsistent identification of the dominant eye across tests: Agreement on left-eye dominance, right-eye dominance, or nondominance by both tests occurred only for 11 of 40 observers (27.5%); the remaining 29 observers were classified differently by each test, including 14 cases (35%) of opposite classification (left-eye dominance by one test and right-eye dominance by the other). Classical tests also yielded conflicting results that did not agree well with classification based on psychophysical tests. The results are discussed in the context of determination of ocular dominance for clinical decisions. SAGE Publications 2019-04-29 /pmc/articles/PMC6492369/ /pubmed/31069044 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2041669519841397 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Creative Commons CC-BY: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Article García-Pérez, Miguel A. Peli, Eli Psychophysical Tests Do Not Identify Ocular Dominance Consistently |
title | Psychophysical Tests Do Not Identify Ocular Dominance
Consistently |
title_full | Psychophysical Tests Do Not Identify Ocular Dominance
Consistently |
title_fullStr | Psychophysical Tests Do Not Identify Ocular Dominance
Consistently |
title_full_unstemmed | Psychophysical Tests Do Not Identify Ocular Dominance
Consistently |
title_short | Psychophysical Tests Do Not Identify Ocular Dominance
Consistently |
title_sort | psychophysical tests do not identify ocular dominance
consistently |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6492369/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31069044 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2041669519841397 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT garciaperezmiguela psychophysicaltestsdonotidentifyoculardominanceconsistently AT pelieli psychophysicaltestsdonotidentifyoculardominanceconsistently |