
© Getty ImagesWhen a patient fails an eye test, it's not just structural defects in the eye that are to blame. New Rochester research show that small eye movements humans aren’t even aware of making play a large role in humans’ ability to see letters, numbers, and objects from a distance.
Visual acuity — the ability to discern letters, numbers, and objects from a distance — is essential for many tasks, from recognizing a friend across a room to driving a car.
Researchers previously assumed that visual acuity was primarily determined by the optics of the eye and the anatomy of the retina. Now, researchers from the
University of Rochester — including
Michele Rucci, a professor of
brain and cognitive sciences, and
Janis Intoy, a neuroscience graduate student at Boston University and a research assistant in Rucci's lab in Rochester —
show that small eye movements humans aren't even aware of making play a large role in humans' visual acuity. The research, published in the journal
Nature Communications, may lead to improved treatments and therapies for vision impairments.
Unlike a stationary camera that takes a fixed photograph of the world, human eyes are constantly moving, taking in new pieces of a visual scene and continually changing the visual input to the retina.
"Humans are normally not aware that their eyes are always in motion, even when attempting to maintain a steady gaze on a point," Intoy says.
These gaze shifts, known as fixational eye movements, were once thought to be inconsequential because they are so small. But, they are large on a microscopic level, relative to the size of cells in the retina, and they shift the image across many receptors. Rucci and the members of his lab have progressively shown that these movements are
critical to processes in the visual system.
Comment: See also:
- Dead Zone? Area with no life found on Earth
- Extremophile worm discovered that has 'three sexes'
- Totally new species of Tardigrade discovered in Japanese carpark (PHOTOS)
And check out SOTT radio's: The Truth Perspective: Are Cells the Intelligent Designers? Why Creationists and Darwinists Are Both Wrong