ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2026
Retinal-Specificity of Sensory Eye Dominance and Its Learning-Induced Improvements.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Sensory eye dominance (SED) is typically quantified at the fovea, but there is no reason to assume it should be uniform across the visual field. Here, we asked whether SED varies across the visual field (Experiment 1) and examined whether training-induced SED changes are transferable to untrained retinal locations (Experiment 2). Methods: Forty-eight normal-sighted adults participated across two experiments (24 per experiment). A dichoptic signal-in-noise motion task was employed in both to quantify SED and to serve as the training paradigm. In Experiment 1, SED was systematically mapped at the fovea (0°) and at 16 peripheral locations, defined by two eccentricities (3° and 6°) and eight polar angles (0° to 315° in 45° increments). In Experiment 2, SED was assessed at the fovea and four peripheral sites at 7.5° eccentricity along the cardinal meridians, before and after three days of perceptual training conducted at the fovea. Results: Group-level results from Experiment 1 revealed no systematic variation in SED across the visual field. However, individuals with stronger dominance exhibited a consistent dominant eye across retinal locations, while those with weaker dominance showed more inconsistent patterns of dominance. In Experiment 2, improvements in SED after perceptual training were confined to the trained foveal location and did not transfer to untrained regions. Motion sensitivity (thresholds), however, improved across all tested retinal locations. Conclusions: The localized variability in SED, particularly among weakly dominant individuals, together with retinotopically-specific training effects, implicates early retinotopic visual areas as key substrates underlying both SED and its learning-dependent plasticity.
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.