The Tölz Temporal Topography Study: mapping the visual field across the life span. Part II: cognitive factors shaping visual field maps

Asymmetries in visual acuity around the visual field

Human vision is heterogeneous around the visual field. At a fixed eccentricity, performance is better along the horizontal than the vertical meridian and along the lower than the upper vertical meridian. These asymmetric patterns, termed performance fields, have been found in numerous visual tasks, including those mediated by contrast sensitivity and spatial resolution. However, it is unknown whether spatial resolution asymmetries are confined to the cardinal meridians or whether and how far they extend into the upper and lower hemifields. Here, we measured visual acuity at isoeccentric peripheral locations (10 deg eccentricity), every 15° of polar angle. On each trial, observers judged the orientation (± 45°) of one of four equidistant, suprathreshold grating stimuli varying in spatial frequency (SF). On each block, we measured performance as a function of stimulus SF at 4 of 24 isoeccentric locations. We estimated the 75%-correct SF threshold, SF cutoff point (i.e., chance-level), and slope of the psychometric function for each location. We found higher SF estimates (i.e., better acuity) for the horizontal than the vertical meridian and for the lower than the upper vertical meridian. These asymmetries were most pronounced at the cardinal meridians and decreased gradually as the angular distance from the vertical meridian increased. This gradual change in acuity with polar angle reflected a shift of the psychometric function without changes in slope. The same pattern was found under binocular and monocular viewing conditions. These findings advance our understanding of visual processing around the visual field and help constrain models of visual perception.

Individual differences in the shape of the nasal visual field

Between-subject differences in the shape of the nasal visual field were assessed for 103 volunteers 21-85years of age and free of visual disorder. Perimetry was conducted with a stimulus for which contrast sensitivity is minimally affected by peripheral defocus and decreased retinal illumination. One eye each was tested for 103 volunteers free of eye disease in a multi-center prospective longitudinal study. A peripheral deviation index was computed as the difference in log contrast sensitivity at outer (25-29° nasal) and inner (8° from fixation) locations. Values for this index ranged from 0.01 (outer sensitivity slightly greater than inner sensitivity) to -0.7 log unit (outer sensitivity much lower than inner sensitivity). Mean sensitivity for the inner locations was independent of the deviation index (R²<1%), while mean sensitivity for the outer locations was not (R²=38%, p<0.0005). Age was only modestly related to the index, with a decline by 0.017 log unit per decade (R²=10%). Test-retest data for 21 volunteers who completed 7-10 visits yielded standard deviations for the index from 0.04 to 0.17 log unit, with a mean of 0.09 log unit. Between-subject differences in peripheral deviation persisted over two years of longitudinal testing. Peripheral deviation indices were correlated with indices for three other perimetric stimuli used in a subset of 24 volunteers (R² from 20% to 49%). Between-subject variability in shape of the visual field raises concerns about current clinical visual field indices, and further studies are needed to develop improved indices.

A matter of time: improvement of visual temporal processing during training-induced restoration of light detection performance

The issue of how basic sensory and temporal processing are related is still unresolved. We studied temporal processing, as assessed by simple visual reaction times (RT) and double-pulse resolution (DPR), in patients with partial vision loss after visual pathway lesions and investigated whether vision restoration training (VRT), a training program designed to improve light detection performance, would also affect temporal processing. Perimetric and campimetric visual field tests as well as maps of DPR thresholds and RT were acquired before and after a 3 months training period with VRT. Patient performance was compared to that of age-matched healthy subjects. Intact visual field size increased during training. Averaged across the entire visual field, DPR remained constant while RT improved slightly. However, in transition zones between the blind and intact areas (areas of residual vision) where patients had shown between 20 and 80% of stimulus detection probability in pre-training visual field tests, both DPR and RT improved markedly. The magnitude of improvement depended on the defect depth (or degree of intactness) of the respective region at baseline. Inter-individual training outcome variability was very high, with some patients showing little change and others showing performance approaching that of healthy controls. Training-induced improvement of light detection in patients with visual field loss thus generalized to dynamic visual functions. The findings suggest that similar neural mechanisms may underlie the impairment and subsequent training-induced functional recovery of both light detection and temporal processing.