Although several accounts of autism have predicted that the disorder should be associated with a decreased susceptibility to visual illusions, previous experimental results have been mixed. This study examined whether a link between autism and illusion susceptibility can be more convincingly demonstrated by assessing the relationships between susceptibility and the extent to which several individual autistic traits are exhibited as a continuum in a population of college students. A significant relationship was observed between the systemizing trait and susceptibility to a subset of the tested illusions (the rod-and-frame, Roelofs, Ponzo and Poggendorff illusions). These results provide support for the idea that autism involves an imbalance between the processing of local and global cues, more heavily weighted toward local features than in the typically developed individual.

The visual accessibility of a space refers to the effectiveness with which vision can be used to travel safely through the space. For people with low vision, the detection of steps and ramps is an important component of visual accessibility. We used ramps and steps as visual targets to examine the interacting effects of lighting, object geometry, contrast, viewing distance and spatial resolution. Wooden staging was used to construct a sidewalk with transitions to ramps or steps. 48 normally sighted subjects viewed the sidewalk monocularly through acuity-reducing goggles, and made recognition judgments about the presence of the ramps or steps. The effects of variation in lighting were milder than expected. Performance declined for the largest viewing distance, but exhibited a surprising reversal for nearer viewing. Of relevance to pedestrian safety, the step up was more visible than the step down. We developed a probabilistic cue model to explain the pattern of target confusions. Cues determined by discontinuities in the edge contours of the sidewalk at the transition to the targets were vulnerable to changes in viewing conditions. Cues associated with the height in the picture plane of the targets were more robust.

Purpose Detecting and recognizing steps and ramps is an important component of the visual accessibility of public spaces for people with impaired vision. The present study, which is part of a larger program of research on visual accessibility, investigated the impact of two factors that may facilitate the recognition of steps and ramps during low-acuity viewing. Visual texture on the ground plane is an environmental factor that improves judgments of surface distance and slant. Locomotion (walking) is common during observations of a layout, and may generate visual motion cues that enhance the recognition of steps and ramps. Methods In two experiments, normally sighted subjects viewed the targets monocularly through blur goggles that reduced acuity to either approx. 20/150 Snellen (mild blur) or 20/880 (severe blur). The subjects judged whether a step, ramp or neither was present ahead on a sidewalk. In the texture experiment, subjects viewed steps and ramps on a surface with a coarse black-and-white checkerboard pattern. In the locomotion experiment, subjects walked along the sidewalk toward the target before making judgments. Results Surprisingly, performance was lower with the textured surface than with a uniform surface, perhaps because the texture masked visual cues necessary for target recognition. Subjects performed better in walking trials than in stationary trials, possibly because they were able to take advantage of visual cues that were only present during motion. Conclusions We conclude that under conditions of simulated low acuity, large, high-contrast texture elements can hinder the recognition of steps and ramps while locomotion enhances recognition.

PURPOSE. Detection and recognition of ramps and steps are important for the safe mobility of people with low vision. Our primary goal was to assess the impact of viewing conditions and environmental factors on the recognition of these targets by people with low vision. A secondary goal was to determine if results from our previous studies of normally sighted subjects, wearing acuity-reducing goggles, would generalize to low vision. METHODS.Sixteen subjects with heterogeneous forms of low vision participated-acuities from approximately 20/200 to 20/2000. They viewed a sidewalk interrupted by one of five targets: a single step up or down, a ramp up or down, or a flat continuation of the sidewalk. Subjects reported which of the five targets was shown, and percent correct was computed. The effects of viewing distance, target-background contrast, lighting arrangement, and subject locomotion were investigated. Performance was compared with a group of normally sighted subjects who viewed the targets through acuityreducing goggles.RESULTS. Recognition performance was significantly better at shorter distances and after locomotion (compared with purely stationary viewing). The effects of lighting arrangement and target-background contrast were weaker than hypothesized. Visibility of the targets varied, with the step up being more visible than the step down. CONCLUSIONS.The empirical results provide insight into factors affecting the visibility of ramps and steps for people with low vision. The effects of distance, target type, and locomotion were qualitatively similar for low vision and normal vision with artificial acuity reduction. However, the effects of lighting arrangement and background contrast were only significant for subjects with normal vision. (Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013; 54:288-294)