ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2020
With Motion Perception, Good Visual Acuity May Not Be Necessary for Driving Hazard Detection.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Visual motion sensitivity and driving performance and safety.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Review
- Optic flow density modulates corner-cutting in a virtual steering task for younger and older adults.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The impact of different corneal refractive surgeries on binocular dynamic visual acuity.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the Driving Safety of Visually Impaired Bioptic Drivers Based on Critical Events in Naturalistic Driving.Translational vision science & technology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the roles of motion perception and visual acuity in driving hazard detection. Methods: Detection of driving hazard was tested based on video and still-frames of real-world road scenes. In the experiment using videos, 20 normally sighted participants were tested under four conditions: with or without motion interruption by interframe mask, and with or without simulated low visual acuity (20/120 on average) by using a diffusing filter. Videos were down-sampled to 2.5 Hz, to allow the addition of motion interrupting masks between the frames to maintain video durations. In addition, single still frames extracted from the videos were shown in random order to eight normally sighted participants, who judged whether the frames were during ongoing hazards, with or without the diffuser. Sensitivity index d-prime (d') was compared between unmasked motion ( Results: In the experiment using videos, there was a significant reduction in a combined performance score (taking account of reaction time and detection rate) when the motion was disrupted ( Conclusions: Motion perception plays a more important role than visual acuity for detecting driving hazards. Translational Relevance: Motion perception may be a relevant criterion for fitness to drive.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.