Exploring eye movement analysis as a measure of selective visual attention in brain injured individuals

Primary Objective: To investigate the utility of using a new method of assessment for deficits in selective visual attention (SVA). Methods and Procedures: An independent groups design compared six participants with brain injuries with six participants from a non-brain injured control group. The Sensomotoric Instruments Eye Movement system with remote eye-tracking device (eye camera), and 2 sets of eight stimuli were employed to determine if the camera would be a sensitive discriminator of SVA in these groups. Main Outcomes and Results: The attention profile displayed by the brain injured group showed that they were slower, made more errors, were less accurate, and more indecisive than the control group. Conclusions: The utility of eye movement analysis as an assessment method was established, with implications for rehabilitation requiring further development. Key words: selective visual attention, eye movement analysis, brain injury

The visual processing of motion-defined transparency

Our understanding of how the visual system processes motion transparency, the phenomenon by which multiple directions of motion are perceived to co-exist in the same spatial region, has grown considerably in the past decade. There is compelling evidence that the process is driven by global-motion mechanisms. Consequently, although transparently moving surfaces are readily segmented over an extended space, the visual system cannot separate two motion signals that co-exist in the same local region. A related issue is whether the visual system can detect transparently moving surfaces simultaneously, or whether the component signals encounter a serial â??bottleneckâ?? during their processing? Our initial results show that, at sufficiently short stimulus durations, observers cannot accurately detect two superimposed directions; yet they have no difficulty in detecting one pattern direction in noise, supporting the serial-bottleneck scenario. However, in a second experiment, the difference in performance between the two tasks disappears when the component patterns are segregated. This discrepancy between the processing of transparent and non-overlapping patterns may be a consequence of suppressed activity of global-motion mechanisms when the transparent surfaces are presented in the same depth plane. To test this explanation, we repeated our initial experiment while separating the motion components in depth. The marked improvement in performance leads us to conclude that transparent motion signals are represented simultaneously.