Impaired Speed Perception but Intact Luminance Contrast Perception in People With One Eye
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: It is generally accepted that early visual deprivation from monocular enucleation (ME; the surgical removal of one eye) results in intact spatial vision. Yet, motion perception studies in this population yield inconsistent findings. Here, we investigated speed and luminance contrast perception in a group of ME individuals. METHODS: Twelve ME participants (mean age = 24 years; mean age at enucleation = 24 months) and 17 controls (mean age = 25 years) viewing binocularly (BV) and monocularly (MV) completed a series of speed discrimination and luminance contrast detection and discrimination tasks. Stimuli consisted of 0.5 cpd vertical sine wave gratings varying in speed (3.8°/s-24°/s) or luminance contrast (0%-78%). A second set of luminance contrast tasks with 4 cpd gratings teased apart any spatial frequency effects. RESULTS: The ME group exhibited elevated speed discrimination thresholds compared with BV (P = 0.001) and MV (P = 0.027) controls, but intact luminance contrast discrimination (P = 0.530). Notably, both ME and MV groups displayed elevated luminance contrast detection thresholds compared with the BV group (Ps ≤ 0.006). However, the ME group exhibited slightly lower thresholds compared with MV controls for all 4 cpd tasks. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate a disruption in the development of speed perception, but not luminance contrast perception with monocular enucleation. These data highlight the importance of receiving healthy binocular vision during postnatal development for the maturation of cortical regions associated with motion processing.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".