Optometry - Journal of the American Optometric Association
Public healthInteractions of visual and cognitive stress
Section snippets
Methods
Thirty-five subjects in the age group of 18 to 30 years were recruited for the study. This sample size achieves 80% power to detect an R2 of 0.24 attributed to the 2 main effects (cognitive stress and visual stress) and interaction using an F test with a significance level of 0.05, assuming that subjects account for approximately 10% of the variance. The Ohio State University Institutional Review Board approved the protocol. Subjects were recruited from The Ohio State University and nearby
Results
Table 3 provides a summary of the control period before the onset of each experimental condition. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) demonstrated varied consistency across baseline conditions depending on the measure evaluated. EMG recordings were quite variable with an average ICC of 0.42. The most reliable measures were OO 0.75 (electrode placement closest to the lower lid) and the frontalis location. The OO factor score combining 3 locations had a modest ICC of 0.38. The aperture
Discussion
Results from this study show that specific conditions of refractive error blur result in increased OO EMG measures and reduced aperture size, both of which indicate an eyelid squint response to refractive error. Such a mechanism seems to be driven by a benefit that results from squinting, in this case, a clearer visual image. For the low-contrast condition, EMG measures from the OO locations do not show any increase compared with good text conditions, indicating that visual stress from low
Conclusions
The objective of the study was to test the effects of visual and cognitive difficulty levels during reading and video viewing conditions on a set of physiologic measures designed to measure local and central mechanisms. The visual stressor (specific refractive error blur) caused eyelid squint, but low-contrast conditions did not show any changes in the OO EMG. Increasing the cognitive load (especially between the reading conditions) resulted in increased palpebral aperture size under all visual
References (22)
- et al.
Myofascial trigger point development from visual and postural stressors during computer work
J Electromyogr Kinesiol
(2006) Neuroimaging of cognitive load in instructional multimedia
Educational Research Review
(2007)- et al.
Eyelid movements in health and disease. The supranuclear impairment of the palpebral motility
Clin Neurophysiol
(2004) VDTs and vision complaints: a survey
Info Dis
(1992)- et al.
An objective measure of discomfort glare
J Illumin Eng Soc
(1994) - et al.
What are the visual benefits of squinting?
Optom Vis Sci
(2003) - et al.
Is all asthenopia the same?
Optom Vis Sci
(2003) - et al.
Blink rate decreases with eyelid squint
Optom Vis Sci
(2005) - et al.
Orbicularis oculi response to asthenopia-inducing conditions
Optom Vis Sci
(2007) - et al.
Objective measurements of lower-level visual stress
Optom Vis Sci
(2007)
EMG activity and pain development in fibromyalgia patients exposed to mental stress of long duration
Scand J Rheumatol
Cited by (12)
Pickwell’s Binocular Vision Anomalies
2021, Pickwell's Binocular Vision AnomaliesUsing electromyography responses to investigate the effects of the display type, viewing distance, and viewing time on visual fatigue
2017, DisplaysCitation Excerpt :Each participant’s skin (around the left eye, right eye, and forehead) was cleaned with a 70% isopropyl alcohol swab. The Ag/AgCl solid adhesive pre-gelled electrodes were fixed at a distance of 1.5 cm below the lower eyelid margin midway between the medial and lateral canthi of the right and left eyes and separated by 1 cm [45,51,52]. The ground electrode was placed on the forehead.
Effects of display curvature, display zone, and task duration on legibility and visual fatigue during visual search task
2017, Applied ErgonomicsCitation Excerpt :Visual fatigue under low cognitive workload is assessed in tasks such as reading, searching, watching, and entering data (Hwang et al., 1988; Sommerich et al., 2001; Omori et al., 2008; Kong et al., 2011; Wang et al., 2012), whereas visual fatigue primarily due to cognitive workload and visual stress is assessed in tasks such as visual discrimination, reading, computer mouse operation, and typing (Hwang et al., 1988; Sommerich et al., 2001; Omori et al., 2008; Kong et al., 2011; Wang et al., 2012). Visual fatigue is also evaluated using subjective ratings, such as the Visual Fatigue Graphic Rating Scale (VFGRS; Cushman, 1986), Eye Complaint Questionnaire (ECQ; Steenstra et al., 2009), Visual Fatigue induced by Stereoscopic Images (VFSI; Bando et al., 2012), and Visual Fatigue Scale (VFS; Benedetto et al., 2013), and physiological measures, such as critical fusion frequency (CFF; Chi and Lin, 1998; Lin et al., 2009; Bando et al., 2012; Lin and Huang, 2013; Lin et al., 2013), accommodative power (Saito et al., 1993), visual acuity, pupil diameter, ocular speed (Chi and Lin, 1998), electromyogram (EMG) of the orbicularis oculi (Nahar et al., 2011), and brain signals (Yeh et al., 2013). Some previous studies have examined the effects of dual- or multi-monitor settings on user behaviour or performance.
LUMINANCE MEASUREMENT AND ESTIMATION METHODS IN ROAD
2022, Light and Engineering
Disclosure: This study was supported by a grant from the Microsoft Corporation, Advanced Reading Technologies Group.