A paradigm for characterizing motion misperception in people with typical vision and low vision.

PURPOSE: We aimed to develop a paradigm that can efficiently characterize motion percepts in people with low vision and compare their responses with well-known misperceptions made by people with typical vision when targets are hard to see. METHODS: We recruited a small cohort of individuals with reduced acuity and contrast sensitivity (n = 5) as well as a comparison cohort with typical vision (n = 5) to complete a psychophysical study. Study participants were asked to judge the motion direction of a tilted rhombus that was either high or low contrast. In a series of trials, the rhombus oscillated vertically, horizontally, or diagonally. Participants indicated the perceived motion direction using a number wheel with 12 possible directions, and statistical tests were used to examine response biases. RESULTS: All participants with typical vision showed systematic misperceptions well predicted by a Bayesian inference model. Specifically, their perception of vertical or horizontal motion was biased toward directions orthogonal to the long axis of the rhombus. They had larger biases for hard-to-see (low contrast) stimuli. Two participants with low vision had a similar bias, but with no difference between high- and low-contrast stimuli. The other participants with low vision were unbiased in their percepts or biased in the opposite direction. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that some people with low vision may misperceive motion in a systematic way similar to people with typical vision. However, we observed large individual differences. Future work will aim to uncover reasons for such differences and identify aspects of vision that predict susceptibility.

The contribution of image minification to discomfort experienced in wearable optics.

Wearable optics have a broad range of uses, for example, in refractive spectacles and augmented/virtual reality devices. Despite the long-standing and widespread use of wearable optics in vision care and technology, user discomfort remains an enduring mystery. Some of this discomfort is thought to derive from optical image minification and magnification. However, there is limited scientific data characterizing the full range of physical and perceptual symptoms caused by minification or magnification during daily life. In this study, we aimed to evaluate sensitivity to changes in retinal image size introduced by wearable optics. Forty participants wore 0%, 2%, and 4% radially symmetric optical minifying lenses binocularly (over both eyes) and monocularly (over just one eye). Physical and perceptual symptoms were measured during tasks that required head movement, visual search, and judgment of world motion. All lens pairs except the controls (0% binocular) were consistently associated with increased discomfort along some dimension. Greater minification tended to be associated with greater discomfort, and monocular minification was often-but not always-associated with greater symptoms than binocular minification. Furthermore, our results suggest that dizziness and visual motion were the most reported physical and perceptual symptoms during naturalistic tasks. This work establishes preliminary guidelines for tolerances to binocular and monocular image size distortion in wearable optics.