Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T22:38:17.063Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fixational ocular motor control is plastic despite visual deprivation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2002

E.C. HALL  and
K.J. CIUFFREDA
E.C. HALL
Affiliation:
Department of Vision Sciences, State University of New York State College of Optometry, New York, New York Center for Neural Science, New York University, New York, New York
K.J. CIUFFREDA
Affiliation:
Department of Vision Sciences, State University of New York State College of Optometry, New York, New York
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the plasticity of human voluntary fixational eye movement control in relation to visual experience/chronic visual deprivation. Twelve blind adults participated (self-reported vision ≤ light perception in each eye; age range = 23–56 years; visual experience range = 0–28 years; blindness duration range = 6–55 years). Infrared-based recordings of horizontal eye movements were made before, during, and immediately after three 30-s periods of auditory ocular motor feedback, while participants were instructed to look straight ahead and keep their eyes as steady as possible. Percent change in horizontal displacement of the eye during and after feedback was compared with the no-feedback baseline. Eleven of the 12 individuals demonstrated feedback-mediated increase in eye stability, which improved as a function of visual experience. Improved eye stability was inversely related to duration of blindness. Clearly, blind adults can use nonvisual external feedback to stabilize gaze. Thus, the fixational subsystem can exhibit improved voluntary control despite chronic visual deprivation. Possible cortical and subcortical mechanisms are discussed.

Keywords

BlindnessFeedbackFixationOculomotorPlasticity
Type
Research Article
Information
Visual Neuroscience , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , July 2002 , pp. 475 - 481
Copyright
2002 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)