Dependence of reading speed on letter spacing in central vision loss

Optometry and Vision Science

Volumn 89, Issue 9, 2012, Pages 1288-1298

  Chung, Susana T L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

age related macular degeneration; central vision loss; crowding; low vision; reading

Indexed keywords

AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION; CENTRAL VISION; CROWDING; LOW VISION; READING;

INTEGRATION; OPTIMIZATION; VISION AIDS;

OPHTHALMOLOGY;

AGED; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOPHYSICS; READING; SCOTOMA; VISION TEST; VISUAL FIELD;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; FORM PERCEPTION; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PSYCHOPHYSICS; READING; SCOTOMA; VISION TESTS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 84865795092     PISSN: 10405488     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e318264c9dd     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Leat SJ, Rumney NJ. The experience of a university-based low vision clinic. Ophthal Physiol Opt 1990;10:8-15.
2. Elliott DB, Trukolo-Ilic M, Strong JG, Pace R, Plotkin A, Bevers P. Demographic characteristics of the vision-disabled elderly. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1997;38:2566-75.
3. Congdon N, O'Colmain B, Klaver CC, Klein R, Munoz B, Friedman DS, Kempen J, Taylor HR, Mitchell P. Causes and prevalence of visual impairment among adults in the United States. Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122:477-85.
4. 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.
5. Kleen SR, Levoy RJ. Low vision care: Correlation of patient age, visual goals, and aids prescribed. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1981;58:200-5.
6. Bullimore MA, Bailey IL. Reading and eye movements in age-related maculopathy. Optom Vis Sci 1995;72:125-38.
7. Timberlake GT, Mainster MA, Peli E, Augliere RA, Essock EA, Arend LE. Reading with a macular scotoma. I. Retinal location of scotoma and fixation area. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1986;27: 1137-47.
8. White JM, Bedell HE. The oculomotor reference in humans with bilateral macular disease. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1990;31: 1149-61.
9. Fletcher DC, Schuchard RA. Preferred retinal loci relationship to macular scotomas in a low-vision population. Ophthalmology 1997; 104:632-8.
10. Crossland MD, Culham LE, Kabanarou SA, Rubin GS. Preferred retinal locus development in patients with macular disease. Ophthalmology 2005;112:1579-85.
11. Lei H, Schuchard RA. Using two preferred retinal loci for different lighting conditions in patients with central scotomas. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1997;38:1812-8.
12. Duret F, Issenhuth M, Safran AB. Combined use of several preferred retinal loci in patients with macular disorders when reading single words. Vision Res 1999;39:873-9.
13. Timberlake GT, Sharma MK, Grose SA, Maino JH. Retinal locus for scanning text. J Rehabil Res Dev 2006;43:749-60.
14. Crossland MD, Crabb DP, Rubin GS. Task-specific fixation behavior in macular disease. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2011;52:411-6.
15. Stuart JA, Burian HM. A study of separation difficulty. Its relationship to visual acuity in normal and amblyopic eyes. Am J Ophthalmol 1962;53:471-7.
16. Bouma H. Interaction effects in parafoveal letter recognition. Nature 1970;226:177-8.
17. Estes WK, Wolford GL. Effects of spaces on report from tachistoscopically presented letter strings. Psych Sci 1971;25:77-9.
18. Toet A, Levi DM. The two-dimensional shape of spatial interaction zones in the parafovea. Vision Res 1992;32:1349-57.
19. Chung STL, Mansfield JS. Contrast polarity differences reduce crowding but do not benefit reading performance in peripheral vision. Vision Res 2009;49:2782-9.
20. Kooi FL, Toet A, Tripathy SP, Levi DM. The effect of similarity and duration on spatial interaction in peripheral vision. Spat Vis 1994;8: 255-79.
21. Chung STL, Levi DM, Legge GE. Spatial-frequency and contrast properties of crowding. Vision Res 2001;41:1833-50.
22. Chung STL. The effect of letter spacing on reading speed in central and peripheral vision. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43:1270-6.
23. Pelli DG, Palomares M, Majaj NJ. Crowding is unlike ordinary masking: Distinguishing feature integration from detection. J Vis 2004;4:1136-69.
24. Levi DM, Hariharan S, Klein SA. Suppressive and facilitatory spatial interactions in peripheral vision: Peripheral crowding is neither size invariant nor simple contrast masking. J Vis 2002;2:167-77.
25. Levi DM, Klein SA, Aitsebaomo AP. Vernier acuity, crowding and cortical magnification. Vision Res 1985;25:963-77.
26. Pelli DG, Tillman KA, Freeman J, Su M, Berger TD, Majaj NJ. Crowding and eccentricity determine reading rate. J Vis 2007;7(2): 20, 1-36.
27. Pelli DG, Tillman KA. The uncrowded window of object recognition. Nat Neurosci 2008;11:1129-35.
28. Treisman AM, Gelade G. A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognit Psychol 1980;12:97-136.
29. Bernard JB, Chung STL. The dependence of crowding on flanker complexity and target-flanker similarity. J Vis 2011;11(8):1, 1-16.
30. Nandy AS, Tjan BS. The nature of letter crowding as revealed by firstand second-order classification images. J Vis 2007;7(2):5, 1-26.
31. van den Berg R, Roerdink JB, Cornelissen FW. A neurophysiologically plausible population code model for feature integration explains visual crowding. PLoS Comput Biol 2010;6:e1000646.
32. Nandy AS, Tjan BS. Saccade-confounded image statistics explain visual crowding. Nat Neurosci 2012;15:463-9, S1-2.
33. Bouma H. Visual interference in the parafoveal recognition of initial and final letters of words. Vision Res 1973;13:767-82.
34. Chung STL, 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.
35. Yu D, Cheung SH, Legge GE, Chung STL. Effect of letter spacing on visual span and reading speed. J Vis 2007;7(2):2, 1-10.
36. Kilgarriff A. Putting frequencies in the dictionary. Int J Lexicogr 1997;10:135-55.
37. Mansfield JS, Legge GE, Bane MC. Psychophysics of reading. XV: Font effects in normal and low vision. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1996;37:1492-501.
38. Rubin GS, Turano K. Reading without saccadic eye movements. Vision Res 1992;32:895-902.
39. Rubin GS, Turano K. Low vision reading with sequential word presentation. Vision Res 1994;34:1723-33.
40. Levi DM, Song S, Pelli DG. Amblyopic reading is crowded. J Vis 2007;7(2):21, 1-17.
41. Cheung SH, Kallie CS, Legge GE, Cheong AM. Nonlinear mixedeffects modeling of MNREAD data. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2008;49:828-35.
42. Legge GE, Mansfield JS, Chung STL. Psychophysics of reading. XX. Linking letter recognition to reading speed in central and peripheral vision. Vision Res 2001;41:725-43.
43. Legge GE, Cheung SH, Yu D, Chung STL, Lee HW, Owens DP. The case for the visual span as a sensory bottleneck in reading. J Vis 2007;7(2):9, 1-15.
44. Chung STL, Legge GE, Cheung SH. Letter-recognition and reading speed in peripheral vision benefit from perceptual learning. Vision Res 2004;44:695-709.
45. Cheong AM, Legge GE, Lawrence MG, Cheung SH, Ruff MA. Relationship between visual span and reading performance in agerelated macular degeneration. Vision Res 2008;48:577-88.
46. Pelli DG, Farell B, Moore DC. The remarkable inefficiency of word recognition. Nature 2003;423:752-6.
47. Kabanarou SA, Crossland MD, Bellmann C, Rees A, Culham LE, Rubin GS. Gaze changes with binocular versus monocular viewing in age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 2006;113: 2251-8.
48. Schuchard RA, Naseer S, de Castro K. Characteristics of AMD patients with low vision receiving visual rehabilitation. J Rehabil Res Dev 1999;36:294-302.
49. Parkes L, Lund J, Angelucci A, Solomon JA, Morgan M. Compulsory averaging of crowded orientation signals in human vision. Nat Neurosci 2001;4:739-44.
50. Petrov Y, Popple AV. Crowding is directed to the fovea and preserves only feature contrast. J Vis 2007;7(2):8, 1-9.
51. Greenwood JA, Bex PJ, Dakin SC. Positional averaging explains crowding with letter-like stimuli. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2009; 106:13130-5.
52. Flom MC, Weymouth FW, Kahneman D. Visual resolution and contour interaction. J Opt Soc Am 1963;53:1026-32.
53. Strasburger H, Harvey LO, Jr., Rentschler I. Contrast thresholds for identification of numeric characters in direct and eccentric view. Percept Psychophys 1991;49:495-508.
54. Martelli M, Majaj NJ, Pelli DG. Are faces processed like words? A diagnostic test for recognition by parts. J Vis 2005;5:58-70.
55. Westbury C, Buchanan L. The probability of the least likely nonlength-controlled bigram affects lexical decision reaction times. Brain Lang 2002;81:66-78.
56. Stevens M, Grainger J. Letter visibility and the viewing position effect in visual word recognition. Percept Psychophys 2003;65:133-51.
57. Grainger J, Granier JP, Farioli F, Van Assche E, van Heuven WJ. Letter position information and printed word perception: The relative-position priming constraint. J Exp PsycholHumPercept Perform 2006;32:865-84.
58. Dandurand F, Grainger J, Dunabeitia JA, Granier JP. On coding non-contiguous letter combinations. Front Psychol 2011;2:136.
59. Pelli DG, Tillman KA. Parts, wholes, and context in reading: A triple dissociation. PLoS One 2007;2(8):e680.
60. Chung STL. Reading speed benefits from increased vertical word spacing in normal peripheral vision. Optom Vis Sci 2004;81:525-35.
61. Chung STL, Jarvis SH, Woo SY, Hanson K, Jose RT. Reading speed does not benefit from increased line spacing in AMD patients. Optom Vis Sci 2008;85:827-33.
62. Chung STL, Lin Y. The two-dimensional shape of spatial interaction zones at the PRLs of observers with central vision loss. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2008;49:E-Abstract 1509.
63. Calabrèse A, Bernard JB, Hoffart L, Faure G, Barouch F, Conrath J, Castet E. Small effect of interline spacing on maximal reading speed in low-vision patients with central field loss irrespective of scotoma size. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2010;51:1247-54.