English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Previous research work suggests that predictable target motion such as sinusoidal movement can be anticipated by the visual system, thereby improving the accommodative response. The validity of predictable motion for studying human dynamic accommodation is sometimes put into question. The aim of this work was to assess the effect of anticipation along with learning (and motivation, etc.) and fatigue (and boredom, loss of attention, etc.) on dynamic accommodation experiments from a practical perspective. Specifically, changes in amplitude and temporal phase lag were estimated within and between trials as 9 adult observers were instructed to focus on a stimulus that oscillated sinusoidally towards and away from the eye at specific temporal frequencies. On average, amplitude decreased whereas phase increased within trials. No evidence of anticipation or learning was observed either within or between trials. Fatigue consistently dominated anticipation and learning within the course of each trial. Even if the eye is equipped by a  prediction operator  as it is often assumed, fatigue confounds the results from dynamic accommodation experiments more than anticipation or learning.

Predictability of sinusoidally moving stimuli does not improve the accuracy of the accommodative response