July 2019
Volume 60, Issue 9
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   July 2019
Improving reading by text motion for sentences masked with noise or with visual impairment
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Ann E Elsner
    Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, United States
    Aeon Imaging, LLC, Bloomington, Indiana, United States
  • Robert N Gilbert
    Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, United States
  • Shirin E Hassan
    Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, United States
  • Raymond Luval Warner
    Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, United States
  • Bryan P Haggerty
    Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, United States
  • Elli J Kollbaum
    Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, United States
  • Christopher Anderson Clark
    Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, United States
  • Matthew S Muller
    Aeon Imaging, LLC, Bloomington, Indiana, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Ann Elsner, Aeon Imaging (I), Aeon Imaging (P); Robert Gilbert, None; Shirin Hassan, None; Raymond Warner, None; Bryan Haggerty, None; Elli Kollbaum, None; Christopher Clark, None; Matthew Muller, Aeon Imaging (I), Aeon Imaging (P)
  • Footnotes
    Support  NIDILRR BISA0004-02, NIH NEI EY018772
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science July 2019, Vol.60, 1419. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Ann E Elsner, Robert N Gilbert, Shirin E Hassan, Raymond Luval Warner, Bryan P Haggerty, Elli J Kollbaum, Christopher Anderson Clark, Matthew S Muller; Improving reading by text motion for sentences masked with noise or with visual impairment. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2019;60(9):1419.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : To simulate visual impairment across the macula, we masked sentences with patterned noise. We previously observed that reading speed and error rate are improved by oscillating the sentences in noise, and now characterize reading as a function of noise contrast and age group. We compared older subjects to patients with macular disease.

Methods : We tested a broad range of subjects with normal contrast sensitivity (Pelli-Robson) no macular scotoma. Control subjects (27 - 70 yr, 47.1 + 16.6 yr, 5 females and 5 males, and spherical error 3.5 to -7.5 D) were divided into groups of 5 younger (< 50 yr) and 5 older ( > 50 yr). We compared the older group to 2 patients with macular pathology, one with partial macular hole and the other with early age-related macular degeneration but no focal defect. Using a digital light ophthalmoscope (DLO), we presented sentences via Maxwellian view in a 28 x 18 deg field. We determined retinal locus by simultaneously capturing coplanar retinal images at 860 nm in a 28 deg field. Subjects read each IU Read sentence separately, which were displayed with a 1920 x 1080 pixel resolution, at 20/60 Helvetica font. The text contrast (delta I/I) was 50%. The added noise had a center spatial frequency of 5.8 c/deg, and Michelson contrast 0 - 40%. Each 10 – 14 word sentence was stationary or moved horizontally in a sinusoidal manner, with amplitude from 0 - 2 deg and velocity from 0 - 2 Hz.

Results : When no motion was present, reading rate declined as a sigmoidal function of noise contrast (p = .002). The improvement of reading with text motion depended on noise contrast. With no text motion, younger subjects read faster than older ones (p=.039), improving with motion when contrast was .3 by 19 and 29 words per minute. Reading rate at 0 noise contrast was 171 +/- 37.2 words per minute for younger subjects vs. 143 +/- 15.5 for older ones. The patients required 100% contrast letters even with 0 contrast noise, missing .168, .025 of the words, respectively ( .00067 errors for controls). With motion, the patients’ errors reduced to .060 and .0085 words, vs. .0081 for controls, with slower reading rates, 47 and 88 vs. 135 +/ -8.5 words per minute. In noise subjects scanned inappropriately right to left.

Conclusions : Improvement by controls in reading sentences in noise, and by patients with visual impairment, can occur with text motion.

This abstract was presented at the 2019 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Vancouver, Canada, April 28 - May 2, 2019.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×