Mental effort required for walking: Effects of retinitis pigmentosa

Optometry and Vision Science

Volumn 75, Issue 12, 1998, Pages 879-886

  Turano, Kathleen A ^a,c   Geruschat, Duane R ^a,b   Stahl, Julie W ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Maryland School for the Blind   (United States)

^c Lions Vision Center   (United States)

Author keywords

Dual task methodology; Mental effort; Mobility; Retinitis pigmentosa; Walking

Indexed keywords

BIOMECHANICS; DISEASES;

DUAL-TASK METHODOLOGY; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT;

OPHTHALMOLOGY;

ACCIDENT PRONENESS; ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; EYE FIXATION; FALLING; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LOCOMOTION; MALE; MENTAL PERFORMANCE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESPONSE TIME; RETINITIS PIGMENTOSA; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISION; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL AID; VISUAL DISCRIMINATION; VISUAL FIELD; WALKING SPEED;

EID: 0032435760     PISSN: 10405488     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00006324-199812000-00010     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Geruschat DR, Turano KA, Stahl JW. Traditional measures of mobility performance and retinitis pigmentosa. Optom Vis Sci 1998;75: 525-37.
2. Haymes S, Guest D, Heyes A, Johnston A. Mobility of people with retinitis pigmentosa as a function of vision and psychological variables. Optom Vis Sci 1996;73:621-37.
3. Kahneman D. Attention and Effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1973.
4. Massof RW, Dagnelie G, Benzshawwel T, Palmer RW, Finkelstein D. First order dynamics of visual field loss in retinitis pigmentosa. Clin Vision Sci 1990;5:1-26.
5. Massof RW, Finkelstein D. A two-stage hypothesis for the natural cause of retinitis pigmentosa. Adv Biosci 1987;62:29-58.
6. Pulos E, Ruther K, VerHoeve J, Bresnick G. Assessment of spatiotemporal contrast sensitivity in retinitis pigmentosa. In: Noninvasive Assessment of the Visual System. Technical Digest Series, vol 3. Washington, DC: Optical Society of America, 1988:54-7.
7. Alexander KR, Derlacki DJ, Fishman GA. Contrast thresholds for letter identification in retinitis pigmentosa. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1992;33:1846-52.
8. Marmor MF. Visual loss in retinitis pigmentosa. Am J Ophthalmol 1980;89:692-8.
9. Farber MD, Fishman GA, Weiss RA. Autosomal dominantly inherited retinitis pigmentosa: visual acuity loss by subtype. Arch Ophthalmol 1985;103:524-8.
10. Madreperla SA, Palmer RW, Massof RW, Finkelstein D. Visual acuity loss in retinitis pigmentosa: relationship to visual field loss. Arch Ophthalmol 1990;108:358-61.
11. Rayner K, Pollatsek A. The Psychology of Reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1989.
12. De l'Aune W, Geruschat DR. Clinical application study of training techniques and devices for the blind. Rehabilitation R&D Progress Reports 1988;25:372.
13. Shingledecker CA. Measuring the mental effort of blind mobility. J Vis Impairment Blind 1983;9:334-9.
14. Ferris FL 3rd, Kassoff A, Bresnick GH, Bailey I. New visual acuity charts for clinical research. Am J Ophthalmol 1982;94:91-6.
15. Bailey IL, Bullimore MA, Raasch TW, Taylor HR. Clinical grading and the effects of scaling. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1991;32: 422-32.
16. Pelli DG, Robson JG, Wilkens AJ. The design of a new letter chart for measuring contrast sensitivity. Clin Vision Sci 1988;2:187-99.
17. Dagnelie G. Conversion of planimetric visual field data into solid angles and retinal areas. Clin Vision Sci 1990;5:95-100.
18. Ballard DH, Hayhoe MM, Pelz JB. Memory representation in natural tasks. J Cognitive Neurosci 1995;7:66-80.
19. O'Regan JK. Solving the "real" mysteries of visual perception: the world as an outside memory. Can J Psychol 1992;46:461-88.
20. Legge GE, Ahn SJ, Klitz TS, Luebker A. Psychophysics of reading. XVI. The visual span in normal and low vision. Vision Res 1997;37: 1999-2010.
21. Shingledecker CA. The effects of anticipation on performance and processing load in blind mobility. Ergonomics 1978;21:355-71.