When measuring fixation disparity (an oculomotor vergence error), the question arises as to whether a monocular or binocular calibration is more precise and physiologically more appropriate. In monocular calibrations, a single eye fixates on a calibration target that is taken as having been projected onto the center of the fovea; the corresponding vergence state represents the heterophoria (the resting vergence position), which has no effect on the calibration procedure. In binocular calibrations, a vergence error may be present and may affect the subsequent measurement of the fixation disparity during binocular recordings. This study includes a test of the precision of both monocular and binocular calibrations and an evaluation of the impact of the calibration procedure on the measurement of fixation disparity during a dot scanning task. Our results show that 11 participants (out of 19) each exhibited a significant difference in fixation disparity with the two types of calibration procedures. In addition, the fixation disparity was more strongly affected by heterophoria undergoing monocular calibration, as opposed to binocular calibration. This serves as additional evidence showing that the monocular calibration produces a physiologically more plausible fixation disparity and seems to be more appropriate for studying the full extent of fixation disparity.

New visualization approaches are being actively developed aiming to mitigate the effect of vergence-accommodation conflict in stereoscopic augmented reality; however, high interindividual variability in spatial performance makes it difficult to predict user gain. To address this issue, we investigated the effects of consistent and inconsistent binocular and focus cues on perceptual matching in the stereoscopic environment of augmented reality using a head-mounted display that was driven in multifocal and single focal plane modes. Participants matched the distance of a real object with images projected at three viewing distances, concordant with the display focal planes when driven in the multifocal mode. As a result, consistency of depth cues facilitated faster perceptual judgments on spatial relations. Moreover, the individuals with mild binocular and accommodative disorders benefited from the visualization of information on the focal planes corresponding to image planes more than individuals with normal vision, which was reflected in performance accuracy. Because symptoms and complaints may be absent when the functionality of the sensorimotor system is reduced, the results indicate the need for a detailed assessment of visual functions in research on spatial performance. This study highlights that the development of a visualization system that reduces visual stress and improves user performance should be a priority for the successful implementation of augmented reality displays.

Uncorrected refractive error and unsatisfactory performance on several clinical accommodation and binocular vision tests are more common in children who struggle with reading. The aim of the current study is to explore the prevalence of accommodative and binocular dysfunctions in children with and without reading difficulties. Reading performance was assessed with the Acadience Reading (formerly DIBELS Next) test adjusted and validated for the Latvian language. Children with (N = 39) and without (N = 43) reading difficulties underwent thorough assessment of their subjective refraction, as well as binocular and accommodation functions. The results demonstrate no difference in the prevalence of complaints between children with and without reading difficulties (26% and 23%, respectively). However, children with reading difficulties more frequently present with significant uncorrected refractive errors and/or accommodative and binocular dysfunctions than children without reading difficulties (69% and 47%, respectively). According to the findings, even in cases where a child does not exhibit any ocular or visual complaints, a comprehensive visual function evaluation should be required for any child who struggles with reading.

Purpose. This study was undertaken to investigate how subjectively measured fixation disparity can be explained by (1) the convergent–divergent asymmetry of vergence dynamics (called dynamic asymmetry) for a disparity vergence step stimulus of 1° (60 arc min), (2) the dark vergence, and (3) the nonius bias. Methods. Fixation disparity, dark vergence, and nonius bias were measured subjectively using nonius lines. Dynamic vergence step responses (both convergent and divergent) were measured objectively. Results. In 20 subjects (mean age, 24.5 ± 4.3 years, visual acuity, ≥1.0; all emmetropic except for one with myopia, wearing contact lenses), multiple regression analyses showed that 39% of the variance in subjective fixation disparity was due to the characteristic factors of physiological vergence: dynamic asymmetry (calculated from convergent and divergent velocities), and dark vergence. An additional 23% of variance was due to the subjective nonius bias (i.e., the physical nonius offset required for perceived alignment of binocularly [nondichoptically] presented nonius lines). Together, these factors explained 62% of the interindividual differences in subjectively measured fixation disparity, demonstrating the influence of oculomotor and perceptual factors. Conclusions. Clinically relevant subjective fixation disparity originates from distinct physiological sources. Dynamic asymmetry in vergence dynamics, resting vergence, and nonius bias were found to affect fixation disparity directly, not only via changes in vergence dynamics.

Children with dyslexia have previously been demonstrated to perform more corrective saccades in sequential non-reading saccade tasks, having trouble with maintaining a stable fixation, as well as reduced performance in smooth pursuit tasks. The current study aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of different eye movements (saccades, smooth pursuit eye movements and fixation stability) in children with and without reading difficulties who were tested by a validated reading performance test applied in the school environment. Altogether, 377 children (6–13 years old; 182 boys and 196 girls) were voluntarily involved in the study. Reading performance was determined by the Acadience^® Reading literacy assessment tool. The Tobii Pro Fusion Eye-tracker was applied to determine oculomotor performance in children with and without reading difficulties. The results of saccadic eye movement, smooth pursuit eye movement, and fixation stability in a non-reading task did not reveal a statistically significant difference in oculomotor performance in children with and without reading difficulties. The results of the current study indicate that the oculomotor system in children with reading difficulties (not excluding dyslexia) is intact. The results propose that the observed differences with previous studies exploring eye movements in dyslexic children might be attributed to the participant selection.

(1) Background: Saccadic eye movements are rapid eye movements aimed to position the object image on the central retina, ensuring high-resolution data sampling across the visual field. Although saccadic eye movements are studied extensively, different experimental settings applied across different studies have left an open question of whether and how stimulus parameters can affect the saccadic performance. The current study aims to explore the effect of stimulus contrast and spatial position on saccadic eye movement latency, peak velocity and accuracy measurements. (2) Methods: Saccadic eye movement targets of different contrast levels were presented at four different spatial positions. The eye movements were recorded with a Tobii Pro Fusion video-oculograph (250 Hz). (3) Results: The results demonstrate a significant effect of stimulus spatial position on the latency and peak velocity measurements at a medium grey background, 30 cd/m² (negative and positive stimulus polarity), light grey background, 90 cd/m² (negative polarity), and black background, 3 cd/m² (positive polarity). A significant effect of the stimulus spatial position was observed on the accuracy measurements when the saccadic eye movement stimuli were presented on a medium grey background (negative polarity) and on a black background. No significant effect of stimulus contrast was observed on the peak velocity measurements under all conditions. A significant stimulus contrast effect on latency and accuracy was observed only on a light grey background. (4) Conclusions: The best saccadic eye movement performance (lowest latency, highest peak velocity and accuracy measurements) can be observed when the saccades are oriented to the right and left from the central fixation point. Furthermore, when presenting the stimulus on a light grey background, a very low contrast stimuli should be considered carefully.