Purchase this article with an account.
Jack Phu, Noha Al-Saleem, Michael Kalloniatis, Sieu K. Khuu; Physiologic statokinetic dissociation is eliminated by equating static and kinetic perimetry testing procedures. Journal of Vision 2016;16(14):5. doi: https://doi.org/10.1167/16.14.5.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
In the present study, we measured the extent of statokinetic dissociation (SKD) in normal observers and then equated the psychophysical tasks into a two-interval forced choice (2IFC) procedure. In Experiment 1, we used the Humphrey visual field analyzer in static perimetry and automated kinetic perimetry modes to measure contrast sensitivity thresholds and the Goldmann manual kinetic perimeter to measure isopters. This was carried out using a Goldmann size II target. Goldmann kinetic perimetry was performed manually with both inward (peripheral to center) and outward (center to periphery) directions of movement to deduce an “average” isopter. This revealed the presence of SKD when superimposed upon the map of static contrast threshold results. There was no evidence of any contribution of examiner technique or instrument-specific differences to SKD. In Experiment 2, we determined the psychometric curves plotting proportion seen as a function of stimulus eccentricity with static and kinetic stimuli with a 2IFC procedure and method of constant stimuli. In an additional experiment, we also showed that subjects were able to reliably discriminate whether a stimulus was static, moving inward, or moving outward, and hence, comparisons could be made between static and kinetic perimetry tasks. Overall, by making the task objective and reducing criterion bias, eccentricity thresholds were equated across static and kinetic perimetry methods; hence, no evidence of SKD was seen. We suggest SKD is inherent to the differences in methodology of threshold measurement in conventional static and kinetic perimetry and individual criterion bias.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only