Spontaneous Interblink Time Distributions in Patients with Graves' Orbitopathy and Normal Subjects

Garcia, Denny M.; Pinto, Carlos Eduardo Pinto de; Barbosa, José Carlos; Cruz, Antônio Augusto Velasco e

doi:10.1167/iovs.10-7060

Cited by 14 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 31 publications

(30 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…At least, as based on calculated average values for blink activity, some evidence has been published indicating no obvious net time‐related differences (or changes) in average SBR values over a few minutes . Other studies have extended over one to two hours and averaged values may have been derived from dividing a recording period into shorter intervals of one to five minutes, for example. Some studies provide details of the methods clearly indicating that the subjects were seated, while being evaluated in an experimental room or chamber, while others have asked subjects to be seated while supporting their head on some type of chin rest during recording .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of short‐term variability in human spontaneous blink rate during video observation with or without head / chin support

Doughty

2016

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of short‐term variability in human spontaneous blink rate during video observation with or without head / chin support

Doughty

2016

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Using this procedure we found similar statistics regarding blink rates and IBIs compared with studies using magnetic search coils (e.g., ref. 18), manual video analysis (45), and EEGs (23).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Humans quickly learn to blink strategically in response to environmental task demands

Hoppe

Helfmann

Rothkopf

2018

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eye blinking is one of the most frequent human actions. The control of blinking is thought to reflect complex interactions between maintaining clear and healthy vision and influences tied to central dopaminergic functions including cognitive states, psychological factors, and medical conditions. The most imminent consequence of blinking is a temporary loss of vision. Minimizing this loss of information is a prominent explanation for changes in blink rates and temporarily suppressed blinks, but quantifying this loss is difficult, as environmental regularities are usually complex and unknown. Here we used a controlled detection experiment with parametrically generated event statistics to investigate human blinking control. Subjects were able to learn environmental regularities and adapted their blinking behavior strategically to better detect future events. Crucially, our design enabled us to develop a computational model that allows quantifying the consequence of blinking in terms of task performance. The model formalizes ideas from active perception by describing blinking in terms of optimal control in trading off intrinsic costs for blink suppression with task-related costs for missing an event under perceptual uncertainty. Remarkably, this model not only is sufficient to reproduce key characteristics of the observed blinking behavior such as blink suppression and blink compensation but also predicts without further assumptions the well-known and diverse distributions of time intervals between blinks, for which an explanation has long been elusive.

show abstract

“…The secondary more general goal was to determine the effects of eyeblinks on people’s ability to detect new items. For example, Doughty (2001) concluded that depending on task type (reading, gaze, conversation), spontaneous eyeblink frequency could range from 1.4 to 32.5 blinks per minute (see also Al-Abdulmunem & Briggs, 1999; Garcia, Pinto, Barbosa, & Cruz, 2011; Schaefer, Schaefer, Abib, & Jos&eacute, 2009; Stern, Walrath, & Goldstein, 1984; Tsubota et al, 1996). However, despite this apparent frequency, we do not normally perceive the occurrence of eyeblinks in our everyday functioning, most likely because vision is suppressed during an eyeblink (e.g., Volkmann, Riggs, & Moore, 1980), especially during the initial stages of eye closure (Volkman, Riggs, Ellicott, & Moore, 1982).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Blink and you won’t miss it: The preview benefit in visual marking survives internally generated eyeblinks.

Mühlenen

Watson

Gunnell

2013

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People are able to ignore old (previewed) stimuli in order to prioritize the processing of newly appearing items--the preview benefit (D. G. Watson & G. W. Humphreys, 1997, "Visual marking: prioritizing selection for new objects by top-down attentional inhibition of old objects," Psychological Review, Vol. 104, pp. 90-122). According to the inhibitory visual marking account, this is achieved by the top-down and capacity-limited inhibition of old stimuli already in the field, which leads to a selection advantage for new items when they appear. In contrast, according to the abrupt luminance onset account (M. Donk & J. Theeuwes, 2001, "Visual marking beside the mark: prioritizing selection by abrupt onsets," Perception & Psychophysics, Vol. 63, pp. 891-900), new items capture attention automatically simply because they generate luminance onset signals. Here, we demonstrate that new items can be partially prioritized over old items even when they appear during an eyeblink and so have no unique luminance transients associated with their appearance. Overall, the findings suggest that both the inhibition of old items and attention capture by luminance changes contribute to time-based selection.

show abstract

Spontaneous Interblink Time Distributions in Patients with Graves' Orbitopathy and Normal Subjects

Cited by 14 publications

References 31 publications

Assessment of short‐term variability in human spontaneous blink rate during video observation with or without head / chin support

Assessment of short‐term variability in human spontaneous blink rate during video observation with or without head / chin support

Humans quickly learn to blink strategically in response to environmental task demands

Blink and you won’t miss it: The preview benefit in visual marking survives internally generated eyeblinks.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About