Search

Humans have two, frontally placed eyes and during reading oculomotor and sensory processes are needed to combine the two inputs into a unified percept of the text. Generally, slight vergence errors, i.e., fixation disparities, occur but do not cause double vision since disparate retinal inputs fall into Panum's fusional area, that is, a range of disparity wherein sensory fusion of the two retinal images is achieved. In this study, we report benchmark data with respect to the mean magnitude and range of vertical compared to horizontal fixation disparities for natural reading. Our data clearly fit to an elliptical pattern of Panum's fusional area that corresponds with theoretical estimates. Furthermore, when we examined disparity-driven vergence adjustments during fixations by comparing monocular with binocular reading conditions, we found that only horizontal fixation disparities increased significantly under conditions of monocular stimulation. Also, no significant vertical fine-tuning (vergence adjustment) was observed for vergence eye movements during reading fixations. Thus, horizontal and vertical fixation disparities and vergence adjustments during reading showed quite different characteristics, and this dissociation is directly related to the functional role of vergence adjustments: vertical fusion - and vertical vergence - subserve the maintenance of a single percept and stereopsis by keeping the eyes in register and allowing for horizontal fusional processes to successfully operate over a vertically aligned input. A reliable and stable vertical alignment is, thus, a pre-requisite over which horizontal fusional responses (and depth perception) can work most efficiently - even in a task like reading., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

In reading, binocular eye movements are required for optimal visual processing and thus, in case of asthenopia or reading problems, standard orthoptic and optometric routines check individual binocular vision by a variety of tests. The present study therefore examines the predictive value of such standard measures of heterophoria, accommodative and vergence facility, AC/A-ratio, NPC and symptoms for binocular coordination parameters during reading. Binocular eye movements were recorded (EyeLink II) for 65 volunteers during a typical reading task and linear regression analyses related all parameters of binocular coordination to all above-mentioned optometric measures: while saccade disconjugacy was weakly predicted by vergence facility (15% explained variance), vergence facility, AC/A and symptoms scores predicted vergence drift (31%). Heterophoria, vergence facility and NPC explained 31% of fixation disparity and first fixation duration showed minor relations to symptoms (18%). In sum, we found only weak to moderate relationships, with expected, selective associations: dynamic parameter related to optometric tests addressing vergence dynamics, whereas the static parameter (fixation disparity) related mainly to heterophoria. Most surprisingly, symptoms were only loosely related to vergence drift and fixation duration, reflecting associations to a dynamic aspect of binocular eye movements in reading and potentially non-specific, overall but slight reading deficiency. Thus, the efficiency of optometric tests to predict binocular coordination during reading was low – questioning a simple, straightforward extrapolation of such test results to an overlearned, complex task.

Reading with two eyes necessitates efficient processes of binocular vision, which provide a single percept of the text. These processes come with a binocular advantage: binocular reading shows shorter average fixation durations and sentence reading times when compared to monocular reading. A couple of years ago, we showed for a small sample (N=13) that binocular advantages critically relate to the individual heterophoria (the resting state of vergence). In the present, large-scale replication we collected binocular eye movements (Eyelink II) for 94 participants who read 20 sentences monocularly and 20 sentences binocularly. Further, individual heterophorias were determined using three different optometric standards: objective eye tracking (EyeLink II at 60 cm), Maddox wing test (at 30 cm) and measures following the “Guidelines for the application of the Measuring and Correcting Methodology after H.-J. Haase” (MCH; at 6 m). Binocular eye movements showed typical pattern and we replicated (1) binocular advantages of about 25 ms for average fixation durations and (2) a reduction in binocular advantages when heterophoria increased – but only when heterophoria was identified by EyeLink II or Maddox wing measures; MCH measures of heterophoria did not affect binocular advantages in reading. For large heterophorias binocular reading even turned into a disadvantage. Implications for effect estimations and optometric testing will be discussed.

Reading with two eyes necessitates efficient processes of binocular vision, which provide a single percept of the text. These processes come with a binocular advantage: binocular reading shows shorter average fixation durations and sentence reading times when compared to monocular reading. A couple of years ago, we showed for a small sample (N=13) that binocular advantages critically relate to the individual heterophoria (the resting state of vergence). In the present, large-scale replication we collected binocular eye movements (Eyelink II) for 94 participants who read 20 sentences monocularly and 20 sentences binocularly. Further, individual heterophorias were determined using three different optometric standards: objective eye tracking (EyeLink II at 60 cm), Maddox wing test (at 30 cm) and measures following the "Guidelines for the application of the Measuring and Correcting Methodology after H.-J. Haase" (MCH; at 6 m). Binocular eye movements showed typical pattern and we replicated (1) binocular advantages of about 25 ms for average fixation durations and (2) a reduction in binocular advantages when heterophoria increased - but only when heterophoria was identified by EyeLink II or Maddox wing measures; MCH measures of heterophoria did not affect binocular advantages in reading. For large heterophorias binocular reading even turned into a disadvantage. Implications for effect estimations and optometric testing will be discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contradicting results concerning binocular coordination in reading have been reported: Liversedge et al. (2006) reported a dominance of uncrossed fixations, whereas Nuthmann and Kliegl (2009) observed more crossed fixations in reading. Based on both earlier and continuing studies, we conducted a reading experiment involving varying brightness of background and font. Calibration was performed using Gabor patches presented on grey background. During the experimental session, text had to be read either on dark, bright, or grey background. The data corroborates former results that showed a predominance of uncrossed fixations when reading on dark background, as well as those showing a predominance of crossed fixations, when reading on bright background. Besides these systematic shifts, the new results show an increase in unsystematic variability when changing the overall brightness from calibration to test. The origins of the effects need to be clarified in future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies dealing with developmental aspects of binocular eye movement behavior during reading are scarce. In this study we have explored binocular strategies during reading and visual search tasks in a large population of dyslexic and typical readers. Binocular eye movements were recorded using a video-oculography system in 43 dyslexic children (aged 8 to 13) and in a group of 42 age-matched typical readers. The main findings are (i) ocular motor characteristics of dyslexic children are impaired in comparison to those reported in typical children in reading task ; (ii) a developmental effect exists in reading in control children; in dyslexic children the effect of development was observed only on fixation durations ; (iii) ocular motor behavior in the visual search tasks is similar for dyslexic children and for typical readers, except for the disconjugacy during and after the saccade: dyslexic children are impaired in comparison to typical children. Data reported here confirms and expands previous studies on children’s reading. Both reading skills and binocular saccades coordination improve with age in typical readers. The atypical eye movement’s patterns observed in dyslexic children suggest a deficiency in the visual attentional processing as well as an impairment of the ocular motor saccade and vergence systems interaction.

Studies dealing with developmental aspects of binocular eye movement behavior during reading are scarce. In this study we have explored binocular strategies during reading and visual search tasks in a large population of dyslexic and typical readers. Binocular eye movements were recorded using a video-oculography system in 43 dyslexic children (aged 8-13) and in a group of 42 age-matched typical readers. The main findings are: (i) ocular motor characteristics of dyslexic children are impaired in comparison to those reported in typical children in reading task; (ii) a developmental effect exists in reading in control children, in dyslexic children the effect of development was observed only on fixation durations; and (iii) ocular motor behavior in the visual search tasks is similar for dyslexic children and for typical readers, except for the disconjugacy during and after the saccade: dyslexic children are impaired in comparison to typical children. Data reported here confirms and expands previous studies on children's reading. Both reading skills and binocular saccades coordination improve with age in typical readers. The atypical eye movement's patterns observed in dyslexic children suggest a deficiency in the visual attentional processing as well as an impairment of the ocular motor saccade and vergence systems interaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reading is an activity based on complex sequences of binocular saccades and fixations. During saccades, the eyes do not move together perfectly: saccades could end with a misalignment, compromising fused vision. During fixations, small disconjugate drift can partly reduce this misalignment. We hypothesized that maintaining eye alignment during reading involves active monitoring from posterior parietal cortex (PPC); this goes against traditional views considering only downstream binocular control.Nine young adults read a text; transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was applied over the PPC every 5±0.2 sec. Eye movements were recorded binocularly with Eyelink II. Stimulation had three major effects: (1) disturbance of eye alignment during fixation; (2) increase of saccade disconjugacy leading to eye misalignment; (3) absence of eye alignment reduction during fixation drift. The effects depend on the side; the right PPC was more involved in maintaining alignment over the motor sequence.Thus, the PPC is actively involved in the control of binocular eye alignment during reading, allowing clear vision. Cortical activation during reading is related to linguistic processes and motor control per se. The study might be of interest for the understanding of deficits of binocular coordination, encountered in several populations, e.g. in children with dyslexia.

In our study, 14 subjects read 60 sentences from the Potsdam Sentence Corpus twice (viewing distance: 60 cm), while eye movements were measured with the EyeLink II. We analyzed fixation disparities for complete sentence replications (N=388). After subtracting the average fixation disparity of each sentence from each observation (which gave the “state” fixation disparity), 99% of all remaining fixation disparities were aligned, i.e. smaller than one character width (20 min arc) – depending mostly on incoming saccade amplitude and fixation position. Additionally, we measured the heterophoria for each subject during calibration and found a qualitative relationship between average, individual measures of fixation disparity (“trait” fixation disparity) and heterophoria, after dividing the sample in 3 groups of esophore, exophore and orthophore subjects. We showed that the magnitude of “trait” fixation disparity was biased by the direction of heterophoria: the more eso the heterophoria, the more eso the average sentence fixation disparity. In sum, despite a large “trait” fixation disparity (in the range of -6.6 to +33.6 min arc), “state” fixation disparities within a sentence were on average -0.9 (± 8.7) min arc and, thus, as precise as needed, i.e. within the expected extent of Panum’s area.

Highlights: [•] While reading a text the saccade amplitude is similar for patients with vergence insufficiency compared to controls children. [•] Also, the duration of the fixations is the same for both groups of children. [•] However patients show poor binocular coordination during and after the saccades. [•] After oculomotor training therapy, an improvement of the binocular coordination during and after the saccades is found. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: We investigated the effective fusional range for written stimuli in children and adults in a natural viewing situation. We recorded binocular eye movements in children and adults during processing of stereoscopically presented words in a lexical decision task. The effect of disparity magnitude on ease of fusion caused decreased response accuracy, increasing numbers of fixations and increased trial viewing times when retinal disparity exceeded one character space. The data suggest that retinal inputs of a word that are disparate by up to one character (0.37°) fall within the effective fusional range such that lexical decisions are not impaired. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The goal of this review is to evaluate the literature on binocular coordination during reading and non-reading tasks in adult, child, and dyslexic populations. The review begins with a description of the basic characteristics of eye movements during reading. Then, reading and non-reading studies investigating binocular coordination are evaluated. Areas of future research in the field are identified and discussed. Finally, some general conclusions are made regarding binocular coordination. The review demonstrates that findings from traditionally independent areas of research are largely consistent and complementary. Throughout the review, theoretical and methodological commonalities are identified and clarified in order to advance current understanding of this fundamental aspect of human visual processing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Recent evidence indicates that each eye does not always fixate the same letter during reading and there has been some suggestion that processing difficulty may influence binocular coordination. We recorded binocular eye movements from children and adults reading sentences containing a word frequency manipulation. We found disparities of significant magnitude between the two eyes for all participants, with greater disparity magnitudes in children than adults. All participants made fewer crossed than uncrossed fixations. However, children made a higher proportion of crossed fixations than adults. We found no influence of word frequency on children’s fixations and on binocular coordination in adults. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Binocular coordination of the eyes during reading was examined. Fixation disparity greater than one character occurred on 47% of fixations, with the disparity being predominantly uncrossed (39%), though a small proportion of fixations were crossed. The average magnitude of disparity, measured at the end of fixation, was 1.1 characters for all fixations. For the 47% of non-aligned fixations the average magnitude of disparity was 1.9 characters. Vergence movements that reduced fixation disparity occurred during fixations, and their magnitude was positively correlated with fixation duration. Finally, eye dominance did not modulate fixation disparity magnitude or the proportion of disparate fixations. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The purpose of the present study was to examine in 7 years old normal children who just learnt to read, saccade and fixation characteristics during reading single words. Eight children were studied and their results were compared to those of eight normal adults doing the same task. For each group word reading data were also compared with data in a task requiring saccades and fixations to target-LEDs. Horizontal saccades from both eyes were recorded with a photoelectric device (Oculometer, Bouis). Latencies of saccades both to words and to LEDs presented at predictable location were similar, and they were also similar between children and adults. In contrast, disconjugacy of saccades was significantly increased for children and similar in the two tasks (LEDs or words). Disconjugate post-saccadic drift and its velocity were also significantly higher in children and similar in the two tasks. Substantial conjugate leftward drift was present for children only, and for the word task only. Finally, fixation duration on words was significantly longer in children than in adults. We conclude that binocular coordination and fixation stability is poor in children and that it could be partially responsible for the long fixation duration. Binocular coordination does not depend on the task (LEDs or words) neither for adults, nor for children; this contrasts prior reports. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]