Visual field asymmetries in numerosity processing

A small number of objects can be rapidly and accurately enumerated, whereas a larger number of objects can only be approximately enumerated. These subitizing and estimation abilities, respectively, are both spatial processes relying on extracting information across spatial locations. Nevertheless, whether and how these processes vary across visual field locations remains unknown. Here, we examined if enumeration displays asymmetries around the visual field. Experiment 1 tested small number (1–6) enumeration at cardinal and non-cardinal peripheral locations while manipulating the spacing among the objects. Experiment 2 examined enumeration at cardinal locations in more detail while minimising crowding. Both experiments demonstrated a Horizontal-Vertical Asymmetry (HVA) where performance was better along the horizontal axis relative to the vertical. Experiment 1 found that this effect was modulated by spacing with stronger asymmetry at closer spacing. Experiment 2 revealed further asymmetries: a Vertical Meridian Asymmetry (VMA) with better enumeration on the lower vertical meridian than on the upper and a Horizontal Meridian Asymmetry (HMA) with better enumeration along the left horizontal meridian than along the right. All three asymmetries were evident for both subitizing and estimation. HVA and VMA have been observed in a range of visual tasks, indicating that they might be inherited from early visual constraints. However, HMA is observed primarily in mid-level tasks, often involving attention. These results suggest that while enumeration processes can be argued to inherit low-level visual constraints, the findings are, parsimoniously, consistent with visual attention playing a role in both subitizing and estimation.

Does hemispheric vascular regulation differ significantly in glaucoma patients with altitudinal visual field asymmetry? A single-center, prospective study

Purpose

Vascular risk factors and ocular perfusion are heatedly discussed in the pathogenesis of glaucoma. The retinal vessel analyzer (RVA, IMEDOS Systems, Germany) allows noninvasive measurement of retinal vessel regulation. Significant differences especially in the veins between healthy subjects and patients suffering from glaucoma were previously reported. In this pilot-study we investigated if localized vascular regulation is altered in glaucoma patients with altitudinal visual field defect asymmetry.

Methods

15 eyes of 12 glaucoma patients with advanced altitudinal visual field defect asymmetry were included. The mean defect was calculated for each hemisphere separately (−20.99 ± 10.49 profound hemispheric visual field defect vs −7.36 ± 3.97 dB less profound hemisphere). After pupil dilation, RVA measurements of retinal arteries and veins were conducted using the standard protocol. The superior and inferior retinal vessel reactivity were measured consecutively in each eye.

Results

Significant differences were recorded in venous vessel constriction after flicker light stimulation and overall amplitude of the reaction (p < 0.04 and p < 0.02 respectively) in-between the hemispheres. Vessel reaction was higher in the hemisphere corresponding to the more advanced visual field defect. Arterial diameters reacted similarly, failing to reach statistical significance.

Conclusion

Localized retinal vessel regulation is significantly altered in glaucoma patients with asymmetric altitudinal visual field defects. Veins supplying the hemisphere concordant to a less profound visual field defect show diminished diameter changes. Vascular dysregulation might be particularly important in early glaucoma stages prior to a significant visual field defect.

Fixating at far distance shortens reaction time to peripheral visual stimuli at specific locations

The purpose of the present study was to examine whether the fixation distance in real three-dimensional space affects manual reaction time to peripheral visual stimuli. Light-emitting diodes were used for presenting a fixation point and four peripheral visual stimuli. The visual stimuli were located at a distance of 45cm and at 25° in the left, right, upper, and lower directions from the sagittal axis including the fixation point. Near (30cm), Middle (45cm), Far (90cm), and Very Far (300cm) fixation distance conditions were used. When one of the four visual stimuli was randomly illuminated, the participants released a button as quickly as possible. Results showed that overall peripheral reaction time decreased as the fixation distance increased. The significant interaction between fixation distance and stimulus location indicated that the effect of fixation distance on reaction time was observed at the left, right, and upper locations but not at the lower location. These results suggest that fixating at far distance would contribute to faster reaction and that the effect is specific to locations in the peripheral visual field. The present findings are discussed in terms of viewer-centered representation, the focus of attention in depth, and visual field asymmetry related to neurological and psychological aspects.