Driving with hemianopia: III. Detection of stationary and approaching pedestrians in a simulator

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 55, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 368-374

  Alberti, Concetta F ^a   Peli, Eli ^a   Bowers, Alex R ^a  

^a SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Detection rates; Driving; Response times

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BLINDNESS; CLINICAL ARTICLE; DRIVING ABILITY; FEMALE; HEMIANOPIA; HUMAN; MALE; MOTION ANALYSIS SYSTEM; PEDESTRIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REACTION TIME; TRAFFIC ACCIDENT; VERY ELDERLY; VISUAL ACUITY;

DETECTION RATES; DRIVING; RESPONSE TIMES;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AUTOMOBILE DRIVING; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEMALE; HEMIANOPSIA; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; VISION, BINOCULAR; VISUAL FIELDS; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84896691253     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: 15525783     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.13-12737     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Zhang X, Kedar S, Lynn MJ, Newman NJ, Biousse V. Homonymous hemianopias: clinical-anatomic correlations in 904 cases. Neurology. 2006;66:906-910.
2. Peli E, Peli D. Driving With Confidence: A Practical Guide to Driving with Low Vision. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Company; 2002.
3. Bowers AR, Mandel AJ, Goldstein RB, Peli E. Driving with hemianopia, I: detection performance in a driving simulator. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50:5137-5147.
4. Dow J. Visual field defects may not affect safe driving. Traffic Inj Prev. 2011;12:483-490.
5. Bowers AR, Tant MLM, Peli E. A pilot evaluation of on-road detection performance by drivers with hemianopia using oblique peripheral prisms. Stroke Res Treat. 2012;2012: 176806.
6. Tant MLM, Brouwer WH, Cornelissen FW, Kooijman AC. Driving and visuospatial performance in people with hemianopia. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2002;12:419-437.
7. DVLA Drivers Medical Group. For Medical Practitioners. At a Glance Guide to the Current Medical Standards of Fitness to Drive. Swansea, UK: Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority; 2011.
8. Lovsund P, Hedin A, Tornros J. Effects on driving performance of visual-field defects: a driving simulator study. Accident Anal Prev. 1991;23:331-342.
9. Szlyk JP, Brigell M, Seiple W. Effects of age and hemianopic visual-field loss on driving. Optom Vis Sci. 1993;70:1031-1037.
10. Schulte T, Strasburger H, Muller-Oehring EM, Kasten E, Sabel BA. Automobile driving performance of brain-injured patients with visual field defects. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;78:136-142.
11. Bronstad PM, Bowers AR, Albu A, Goldstein RB, Peli E. Hazard detection by drivers with paracentral homonymous field loss: a small case series. J Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2011; S5:001.
12. Papageorgiou E, Hardiess G, Ackermann H, et al. Collision avoidance in persons with homonymous visual field defects under virtual reality conditions. Vision Res. 2012;52:20-30.
13. Hamel J, Kraft A, Ohl S, De Beukelaer S, Audebert HJ, Brandt SA. Driving simulation in the clinic: testing visual exploratory behavior in daily life activities in patients with visual field defects. J Vis Exp. 2012;67:e4427.
14. Bronstad PM, Bowers AR, Albu A, Goldstein RB, Peli E. Driving with central field loss I: effect of central scotomas on responses to hazards. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2013;131:303-309.
15. Regan D, Kaushal S. Monocular discrimination of the direction of motion in depth. Vision Res. 1994;34:163-177.
16. Schenkenberg T, Bradford DC, Ajax ET. Line bisection and unilateral visual neglect in patients with neurologic impairment. Neurology. 1980;30:509-517.
17. Vanier M, Gauthier L, Lambert J, et al. Evaluation of left visuospatial neglect: norms and discrimination power of two tests. Neuropsychology. 1990;4:87-96.
18. Bowers AR, Mandel AJ, Goldstein RB, Peli E. Driving with hemianopia, II: lane position and steering in a driving simulator. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;51:6605-6613.
19. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. Washington, DC: AASHTO; 2004.
20. Evans L. Traffic Safety. Bloomfield Hills, MI: Science Serving Society; 2004.
21. Loftus GR, Masson MEJ. Using confidence-intervals in withinsubject designs. Psychon B Rev. 1994;1:476-490.
22. Bahill AT, Adler D, Stark L. Most naturally occurring human saccades have magnitudes of 15 degrees or less. Invest Ophthamol. 1975;14:468-469.
23. Wood JM, McGwin G Jr, Elgin J, et al. Hemianopic and quadrantanopic field loss, eye and head movements, and driving. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:1220-1225.
24. Iorizzo DB, Riley ME, Hayhoe M, Huxlin KR. Differential impact of partial cortical blindness on gaze strategies when sitting and walking-an immersive virtual reality study. Vision Res. 2011;51:1173-1184.
25. Papageorgiou E, Hardiess G, Mallot HA, Schiefer U. Gaze patterns predicting successful collision avoidance in patients with homonymous visual field defects. Vision Res. 2012;65: 25-37.
26. Bowers AR, Ananev E, Mandel AJ, Goldstein RB, Peli E. Driving with hemianopia: IV. Head scanning and detection at intersections in a simulator. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. In press.
27. Vargas-Martin F, Peli E. Eye movements of patients with tunnel vision while walking. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47:5295-5302.
28. Luo G, Vargas-Martin F, Peli E. The role of peripheral vision in saccade planning: learning from people with tunnel vision. J Vis. 2008;8(14):25.
29. Warren PA, Rushton SK. Evidence for flow-parsing in radial flow displays. Vision Res. 2008;48:655-663.
30. Royden CS, Connors EM. The detection of moving objects by moving observers. Vision Res. 2010;50:1014-1024.
31. Tyler SC, Grossman ED. Feature-based attention promotes biological motion recognition. J Vis. 2011;11(10):11.
32. Schuett S, Zihl J. Does age matter? Age and rehabilitation of visual field disorders after brain injury. Cortex. 2013;49: 1001-1012.