There is limited recent research on methods to quantify eye dominance under binocular viewing conditions. The studies have predominantly used dichoptic presentation of stimuli to estimate the imbalance in contribution of either eye. The research has included tasks such as form discrimination (Yang, Blake, & McDonald,
2010), motion coherence (Li et al.,
2010), target detection (Valle-Inclán, Blanco, Soto, & Leirós,
2008), and binocular rivalry (Handa et al.,
2004; Handa, Shimizu, Uozato, Shoji, & Ishikawa,
2012). In one of the studies by Handa et al. (
2004), the contrast of rivaling stimuli was manipulated to estimate the interocular difference in duration of exclusive visibility. A large variation in magnitude of interocular imbalance was observed between subjects. However, the sighting dominant eye (hole-in-the-card test) was found to consistently agree with the eye showing longer duration of visibility. In two studies that used nonrivaling stimuli (Li et al.,
2010; Yang et al.,
2010), 38%–39% of the subjects were classified as having strong eye dominance. Both studies found the correlation between sensory eye dominance and sighting dominance (hole-in-the-card) to be weak. On the other hand, one of the studies (Li et al.,
2010) found a greater consistency with the sighting test in the group with strong eye dominance. In the study that used target detection to quantify eye dominance (Valle-Inclán et al.,
2008), a stream of alphanumeric characters was rapidly (200 ms per character) and simultaneously presented to either eye. The subjects' task was to identify a target letter that was presented to only one of the eyes. The interocular difference in target detection probability was found to be normally distributed and typically agreed with sighting eye dominance (Miles ABC). From the data over target detection proportions in this study, it appears that approximately 35%–40% of the subjects showed almost complete LE or RE dominance, while the rest showed different degrees of dominance.