Advertisement

Adaptation to Visual Field Defects with Virtual Reality Scotoma in Healthy Subjects

  • W. H. Zangemeister
  • U. Oechsner
Chapter

Abstract

Normal Subjects (Ss) show a stairstep/overshoot saccadic strategy similar to hemianopic patients either when confronted with a virtual reality model of an artificial hemianopia using eye position feedback (H3 — VRM), or when achieving eccentric fixation using secondary visual feedback (2ndVFB). Here gaze position is displayed simultaneously with the target and the subject learns either to superpose target and eye position feedback, or to position the gaze feedback target up to 9 deg off the target (eccentric fixation), which helps to keep the “blind side” in sight. Using this technique normal Ss confronted with H3 — VRM as well as hemianopic patients minimize their deficit very fast and efficiently, much faster than without 2ndVFB training.

Keywords

Visual Field Defect Visual Imagery Blind Side Homonymous Hemianopia Virtual Reality Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bertera JH (1988) Visual search with simulated skotomas in normal subjects. Invest.Ophthalmol. Vis Sci 29: 470–478PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Brandt S, Stark L (1997) Sponteneous eye movements during visual imagery reflect the content of the visual scene. J Cogn Neurosci 9: 27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gbadamosi J, Oechsner U, Zangemeister WH (1997) Quantitative analysis of gaze movements during Visual Imagery in hemianopic patients and control subjects. J Neurol Rehabil 3: 165–172Google Scholar
  4. Stark L, Ellis S (1981) Scanpaths revisited: Cognitive models in active looking. In: Eye Movements, Cognition and Visual Perception, ed.by B. Fisher, C. Monty and M. Sanders, Erlbaum Press, New Jersey, pp 193–226Google Scholar
  5. Stark L, Choi YS (1996) Experimental metaphysics: the scanpath as an epistemological mechanism. In: Visual attention and aognition, ed. by WH Zangemeister, S Stiehl, C Freksa. Adv Psychol 116: 3–73Google Scholar
  6. Zangemeister WH, Meienberg O, Stark L, Hoyt WF (1982) Eye-head coordination in homonymous hemianopia. J Neurol 225: 243–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Zangemeister WH, Dannheim F, Kunze K (1986) Adaptation of gaze to eccentric fixation in homonymous hemianopia. In: Adaptive processes in visual and oculomotor aystems, ed. by EL Keller, D Zee. Adv in Bio Sci 57: 247–252Google Scholar
  8. Zangemeister WH, Oechsner U, Freksa C (1995) Short-term adaptation of eye movements in patients with visual hemifield defects indicates high level control of human scan path. Optom Vision Science 72: 467–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Zeevi YY, Peli E Stark (1979) Study of eccentric fixation with secondary visual feedback. J Opt Soc Am 69: 669–675PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • W. H. Zangemeister
    • 1
  • U. Oechsner
    • 1
  1. 1.Neurological University Clinic HamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations