Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Mendola, Janine D.; Conner, Ian P. (2006)
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Article

Classified by OpenAIRE into

mesheuropmc: genetic structures, eye diseases
There have been many attempts to define eye dominance in normal subjects, but limited consensus exists, and relevant physiological data is scarce. In this study, we consider two different behavioral methods for assignment of eye dominance, and how well they predict fMRI signals evoked by monocular stimulation. Sighting eye dominance was assessed with two standard tests, the Porta Test, and a ‘hole in hand’ variation of the Miles Test. Acuity dominance was tested with a standard eye chart and with a computerized test of grating acuity. We found limited agreement between the sighting and acuity methods for assigning dominance in our individual subjects. We then compared the fMRI response generated by dominant eye stimulation to that generated by non-dominant eye, according to both methods, in 7 normal subjects. The stimulus consisted of a high contrast hemifield stimulus alternating with no stimulus in a blocked paradigm. In separate scans, we used standard techniques to label the borders of visual areas V1, V2, V3, VP, V4, V3A, and MT. These regions of interest (ROIs) were used to analyze each visual area separately. We found that percent change in fMRI BOLD signal was stronger for the dominant eye as defined by the acuity method, and this effect was significant for areas located in the ventral occipital territory (V1v, V2v, VP, V4). In contrast, assigning dominance based on sighting produced no significant interocular BOLD differences. We conclude that interocular BOLD differences in normal subjects exist, and may be predicted by acuity measures.
  • No references.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Cite this article

Collected from