The Effect Of Misleading Prior Information On The Subjective Visual Vertical

When tilted sideways participants misperceive the visual vertical assessed by means of a luminous line in otherwise complete dark- ness. A recent modeling approach (De Vrijer et al., 2009) claimed that these typical patterns of errors (known as A- and E-effects) could be explained by as- suming that participants behave in a Bayes optimal manner. In this study, we experimentally manipulate participants’ prior information about body-in-space orientation and measure the effect of this manipulation on the subjective visual vertical (SVV). Specifically, we explore the effects of veridical and misleading instructions about body tilt orientations on the SVV. We used a psychophys- ical 2AFC SVV task at roll tilt angles of 0 degrees, 16 degrees and 4 degrees CW and CCW. Participants were tilted to 4 degrees under different instruction conditions: in one condition, participants received veridical instructions as to their tilt angle, whereas in another condition, participants received the mis- leading instruction that their body position was perfectly upright. Our results indicate systematic differences between the instruction conditions at 4 degrees CW and CCW. Participants did not simply use an ego-centric reference frame in the misleading condition; instead, participants’ estimates of the SVV seem to lie between their head’s Z-axis and the estimate of the SVV as measured in the veridical condition. All participants displayed A-effects at roll tilt an- gles of 16 degrees CW and CCW. We discuss our results in the context of the Bayesian model by De Vrijer et al. (2009), and claim that this pattern of re- sults is consistent with a manipulation of precision of a prior distribution over body-in-space orientations. Furthermore, we introduce a Bayesian Generalized Linear Model for estimating parameters of participants’ psychometric function, which allows us to jointly estimate group level and individual level parameters under all experimental conditions simultaneously, rather than relying on the traditional two-step approach to obtaining group level parameter estimates.

Visual Perception and Acuity of Hand Surgeons Using Loupes.

PURPOSE To assess the visual performance of Swiss hand surgeons in an environment similar to their workplace. The influence of Galilean (lenses only) and Keplerian loupes (lenses and prisms), the surgeon's age, and the credibility of a self-assessment of his or her own optical performance were evaluated. METHODS Sixty-three hand surgeons between 29 and 68 years of age with 70 loupes were included in the study (Galilean n = 35, Keplerian n = 35). The visual performance as surgeons was self-assessed on a modified visual analog scale and objectively measured with miniaturized visual tests in a simulated clinical setting. We evaluated the influence of the optical device by comparing Galilean and Keplerian loupes and the influence of the surgeon's age by comparing 2 subgroups: < 40 years and ≥ 40 years. RESULTS The correlation between self-assessment and objective visual performance was weak, with a Spearman rank correlation coefficient of 0.25. The near visual acuity with habitual optical aids showed considerable variability, with a range of 300% in the dimension of the smallest detected structure. The near visual acuity was significantly lower in the older group ≥ 40 years than in the younger group < 40 years with both Galilean and Keplerian loupes. Keplerian loupes allowed a significantly higher visual performance than Galilean loupes. Surgeons 40 years or older using Keplerian loupes had a similar visual acuity to surgeons younger than 40 years with Galilean loupes. CONCLUSIONS The magnified near vision of hand surgeons showed an important individual variability. Self-assessment was not a valuable instrument for surgeons to estimate their own near vision. Hand surgeons older than 40 years should use higher magnification loupes. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Diagnostic III.