Contour enhancement benefits older adults with simulated central field loss

Optometry and Vision Science

Volumn 89, Issue 9, 2012, Pages 1374-1384

  Kwon, Miyoung ^a   Ramachandra, Chaithanya ^c   Satgunam, Premnandhini ^d   Mel, Bartlett W ^b,c   Peli, Eli ^d   Tjan, Bosco S ^a,b,e  

^a Department of Psychology ^*  (United States)

^b Neuroscience Graduate Program   (United States)

^c University of Southern California   (United States)

^d SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

functional ability; Impact of Vision Impairment Questionnaire; low vision questionnaire; rehabilitation; Veterans Affairs Low Vision Visual Functioning Questionnaire

Indexed keywords

AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION; CENTRAL VISION; CENTRAL VISUAL FIELD LOSS; ENHANCEMENT TECHNIQUES; FIELD LOSS; FUNCTIONAL ABILITIES; GAZE-CONTINGENT; IMAGE CONTENT; LOW VISION; LUMINANCE CONTRAST; OLDER ADULTS; PERFORMANCE TESTING; PERIPHERAL VISION; SEARCH PERFORMANCE; SEARCH TIME; VETERANS AFFAIRS LOW-VISION VISUAL FUNCTIONING QUESTIONNAIRE; VISION IMPAIRMENTS; VISION LOSS; VISUAL SEARCH;

IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; OPHTHALMOLOGY; PATIENT REHABILITATION; SURVEYS;

VISION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; ILLUMINATION; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; SCOTOMA; VISUAL FIELD;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ALGORITHMS; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; FEMALE; FORM PERCEPTION; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; LIGHTING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; SCOTOMA; VISUAL FIELDS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84865791836     PISSN: 10405488     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3182678e52     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Anderson SJ, Mullen KT, Hess RF. Human peripheral spatial resolution for achromatic and chromatic stimuli: Limits imposed by optical and retinal factors. J Physiol 1991;442:47-64.
2. Artal P, Derrington AM, Colombo E. Refraction, aliasing, and the absence of motion reversals in peripheral vision. Vision Res 1995;35: 939-47.
3. Robson JG, Graham N. Probability summation and regional variation in contrast sensitivity across the visual field. Vision Res 1981;21: 409-18.
4. Pointer JS, Hess RF. The contrast sensitivity gradient across the human visual field: With emphasis on the low spatial frequency range. Vision Res 1989;29:1133-51.
5. Pointer JS, Hess RF. The contrast sensitivity gradient across the major oblique meridians of the human visual field. Vision Res 1990;30: 497-501.
6. Thibos LN, Still DL, Bradley A. Characterization of spatial aliasing and contrast sensitivity in peripheral vision. Vision Res 1996;36: 249-58.
7. Levi DM. Crowding -an essential bottleneck for object recognition: A mini-review. Vision Res 2008;48:635-54.
8. Pelli DG, Tillman KA. The uncrowded window of object recognition. Nat Neurosci 2008;11:1129-35.
9. Chung ST, Mansfield JS, Legge GE. Psychophysics of reading. XVIII. The effect of print size on reading speed in normal peripheral vision. Vision Res 1998;38:2949-62.
10. Rubin GS, Turano K. Low vision reading with sequential word presentation. Vision Res 1994;34:1723-33.
11. Makela P,Nasanen R, Rovamo J, Melmoth D. Identification of facial images in peripheral vision. Vision Res 2001;41:599-610.
12. Friedman DS, O'Colmain BJ, Munoz B, Tomany SC, McCarty C, de Jong PT, Nemesure B, Mitchell P, Kempen J. Prevalence of agerelated macular degeneration in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122:564-72.
13. Peli E, Woods RL. Image enhancement for impaired vision: The challenge of evaluation. Int J Artif Intell Tools 2009;18:415-38.
14. Fullerton M, Peli E. Digital enhancement of television signals for people with visual impairments: Evaluation of a consumer product. J Soc Inf Disp 2008;16:493-500.
15. Luo G, Satgunam P, Peli E. Visual search performance of patients with vision impairment: Effect of JPEG image enhancement. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt in press.
16. Ramachandra C, Mel BW. Computing local edge probability from a population of simple cells. Poster presented at: The Computational and Systems Neuroscience Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, February 25, 2011. Available at: Http://www.cosyne.org/c/index.php?title-Cosyne-11-posters/II-49. Accessed June 28, 2012.
17. Cornsweet TN. Visual Perception: New York, NY: Academic Press; 1970.
18. Brainard DH. The psychophysics toolbox. Spat Vis 1997;10:433-6.
19. Pelli DG. The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spat Vis 1997;10:437-42.
20. Aguilar C, Castet E. Gaze-contingent simulation of retinopathy: Some potential pitfalls and remedies. Vision Res 2011;51:997-1012.
21. Fine EM, Rubin GS. Effects of cataract and scotoma on visual acuity: A simulation study. Optom Vis Sci 1999;76:468-73.
22. Pidcoe PE, Wetzel PA. Oculomotor tracking strategy in normal subjects with and without simulated scotoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47:169-78.
23. Bernard JB, Scherlen AC, Castet E. Page mode reading with simulated scotomas: A modest effect of interline spacing on reading speed. Vision Res 2007;47:3447-59.
24. Chung ST. Improving reading speed for people with central vision loss through perceptual learning. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2011; 52:1164-70.
25. Owsley C, Sekuler R, Siemsen D. Contrast sensitivity throughout adulthood. Vision Res 1983;23:689-99.
26. Ross JE, Clarke DD, Bron AJ. Effect of age on contrast sensitivity function: Uniocular and binocular findings. Br J Ophthalmol 1985; 69:51-6.
27. Tulunay-Keesey U, Ver Hoeve JN, Terkla-McGrane C. Threshold and suprathreshold spatiotemporal response throughout adulthood. J Opt Soc Am (A) 1988;5:2191-200.
28. Elliott DB. Contrast sensitivity decline with ageing: A neural or optical phenomenon? Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1987;7:415-9.
29. Crassini B, Brown B, Bowman K. Age-related changes in contrast sensitivity in central and peripheral retina. Perception 1988;17: 315-32.
30. Biederman I. Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychol Rev 1987;94:115-47.
31. Huttenlocher DP, Ullman S. Recognizing solid objects by alignment with an image. Int J Comput Vis 1990;5:195-212.
32. Knill DC. Perception of surface contours and surface shape: From computation to psychophysics. J Opt Soc Am (A) 1992;9:1449-64.
33. Oliva A, Torralba A. Modeling the shape of the scene: A holistic representation of the spatial envelope. Int J Comput Vis 2001;42: 145-75.
34. Elliott DB, Hurst MA, Weatherill J. Comparing clinical tests of visual function in cataract with the patient's perceived visual disability. Eye 1990;4:712-7.
35. Superstein R, Boyaner D, Overbury O. Functional complaints, visual acuity, spatial contrast sensitivity, and glare disability in preoperative and postoperative cataract patients. J Cataract Refract Surg 1999;25: 575-81.
36. Satgunam P, Woods RL, Luo G, Bronstad PM, Reynolds Z, Ramachandra C, Mel BW, Peli E. Effects of contour enhancement on low-vision preference and visual search. Optom Vis Sci 2012;89: 1364-73.
37. Fullerton M, Woods RL, Vera-Diaz FA, Peli E. Measuring perceived video quality of MPEG enhancement by people with impaired vision. J Opt Soc Am (A) 2007;24:B174-87.