Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25698702›Full record

ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2015

Space perception of strabismic observers in the real world environment.

Teng Leng Ooi, Zijiang J He

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. First-order basis of second-order temporal loss in amblyopia.Journal of translational medicine · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. From pictures to reality: modelling the phenomenology and psychophysics of 3D perception.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Teng Leng OoiThe Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States.
Zijiang J HeUniversity of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, United States.
The Ohio State University · USUniversity of Louisville · US

Funding

Mid-level mechanisms of surface and binocular perceptionR01EY023561 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE · PI HE, ZIJIANG · 2014 to 2018
$1.7M
Improving Binocular Vision Through Perceptual LearningR01EY023374 · NEI · SALUS UNIVERSITY · PI OOI, TENG LENG · 2014 to 2016
$998k
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY023374NEI NIH HHS R01 EY023561
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSpace perception beyond the near distance range (>2 m) is important for target localization, and for directing and guiding a variety of daily activities, including driving and walking. However, it is unclear whether the absolute (egocentric) localization of a single target in the intermediate distance range requires binocular vision, and if so, whether having subnormal stereopsis in strabismus impairs one's ability to localize the target.

methodsWe investigated this by measuring the perceived absolute location of a target by observers with normal binocular vision (n = 8; mean age, 24.5 years) and observers with strabismus (n = 8; mean age, 24.9 years) under monocular and binocular conditions. The observers used the blind walking-gesturing task to indicate the judged location of a target located at various viewing distances (2.73-6.93 m) and heights (0, 30, and 90 cm) above the floor. Near stereopsis was assessed with the Randot Stereotest.

resultsBoth groups of observers accurately judged the absolute distance of the target on the ground (height = 0 cm) either with monocular or binocular viewing. However, when the target was suspended in midair, the normal observers accurately judged target location with binocular viewing, but not with monocular viewing (mean slant angle, 0.8° ± 0.5° vs. 7.4° ± 1.4°; P < 0.001, with a slant angle of 0° representing accurate localization). In contrast, the strabismic observers with poorer stereo acuity made larger errors in target localization in both viewing conditions, though with fewer errors during binocular viewing (mean slant angle, 2.7° ± 0.4° vs. 9.2° ± 1.3°; P < 0.0025). Further analysis reveals the localization error, that is, slant angle, correlates positively with stereo threshold during binocular viewing (r(2) = 0.479, P < 0.005), but not during monocular viewing (r(2) = 0.0002, P = 0.963).

conclusionsLocating a single target on the ground is sufficient with monocular depth information, but binocular depth information is required when the target is suspended in midair. Since the absolute binocular disparity information of the single target is weak beyond 2 m, we suggest the visual system localizes the single target using the relative binocular disparity information between the midair target and the visible ground surface. Consequently, strabismic observers with residual stereopsis localize a target more accurately than their counterparts without stereo ability.

Indexed as

AdultDepth PerceptionDistance PerceptionFemaleHumansJudgmentMaleOrientationPattern Recognition, VisualReference ValuesSpace PerceptionStrabismusVision, BinocularYoung Adultbinocular depthdistance perceptionspace perceptionstrabismus amblyopiavision directed action

Identifiers

PMID25698702
PMCPMC4358738
OpenAlexW2033985376

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.