Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This article reports the results of a study to assess variations in the indoor and outdoor locomotor mobility of 22 low vision adults. Visual acuity, visual field, and contrast sensitivity data were obtained on all participants. Participants were also videotaped while walking unfamiliar indoor and outdoor routes under normal and reduced illumination. These videotapes were viewed by orientation and mobility instructors, who recorded such incidents as stopping or contacting objects during travel. Mobility assessment data obtained from the videotapes were analyzed in relation to type and degree of visual loss. Individuals’ visual fields and contrast sensitivities were found to be related to mobility performance, whereas their visual acuities were not. Visual field and contrast sensitivity together accounted for 39 percent of the variation in mobility performance. Results of the study are discussed in regard to the importance of visual contrast sensitivity and visual field for functional acitivities such as mobility.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Banks

M.S.

, & Dannemiller

J.L.

(1982). Infant visual psychophysics. In Salapatek

, & Cohen

L.B.

(Eds.), Handbook of infant perception. New York: Academic Press.

Banks

M.S.

, & Salapatek

(1981). Infant pattern vision: A new approach based on the contrast sensitivity function. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 31, 1–45.

Clark-Carter

D.D.

, Heyes

A.D.

, & Howarth

C.l.

(1988). Secondary task as a measure of mental effort: A reappraisal. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 82, 286–287.

Coren

, & Ward

L.M.

(1989). Sensation and perception, 3rd ed. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Dodds

A.G.

, Carter

D.D.C.

, & Howarth

C.I.

(1983). Improving objective measures of mobility. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 77, 438–442.

Genensky

S.M.

, Berry

S.H.

, Bikson

T.H.

, & Bikson

T.K.

(1979). Visual environmental adaptation problems of the partially sighted: Final Report. Santa Monica, CA: Center for the Partially Sighted.

Hughes

R.K.

(1967). Orientation and mobility for the partially sighted. International Journal for the Education of the Blind, 16, 119–120.

Jose

R.T.

(1983). The low vision rehabilitation service. In Jose

R.J.

(ed.), Understanding low vision. New York: American Foundation for the Blind.

Kroon

J.N.

, Rusduk

J.P.

, & van der Wildt

G.J.

(1980). Peripheral contrast sensitivity for sine-wave gratings and single periods. Vision Research, 20, 243–252.

10.

Marron

J.A.

, & Bailey

I.L.

(1982). Visual factors and orientation–mobility performance. American Journal of Optometry and Physiological Optics, 59, 413–426.

11.

Peli

, Arend

L.E.

Jr. , & Timberlake

G.T.

(1986). Computerized image enhancement for visually impaired persons: New technology, new possibilities. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 80, 849–854.

12.

Pelli

D.G.

(1986). The visual requirements of mobility. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Low Vision, Centre for Sight Enhancement, University of Waterloo. Ontario, Canada: Springer-Verlag.

13.

Rieser

J.J.

, Hill

E.W.

, Rosen

, Long

R.G.

, Talor

, & Zimmerman

(1985). The locomotion and mobility of low vision persons. Final Report. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Handicapped Research, Grant No. 1231413680AI.

14.

Sulzer-Azaroff

, & Mayer

G.R.

(1977). Applying behavior analysis procedures with children and youth. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

15.

Welsh

R.L.

, & Blash

B.B.

(1980). Foundations of orientation and mobility. New York: American Foundation for the Blind.

Mobility in Individuals with Moderate Visual Impairments

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References