↓ Skip to main content

Eye preference within the context of binocular functions

Overview of attention for article published in Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, April 2005
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
8 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
Title
Eye preference within the context of binocular functions
Published in
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, April 2005
DOI 10.1007/s00417-005-1128-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Walter H. Ehrenstein, Birgit E. Arnold-Schulz-Gahmen, Wolfgang Jaschinski

Abstract

Eye preference refers to an asymmetric use of the two eyes, but it does not imply a unitary asymmetry between the eyes. Many different methods are used to assess eye preference, including eyedness questionnaires and sighting tasks that require binocular and monocular alignment of a target through a hole in the middle of a card or funnel. The results of these coarse accounts of eye preference are useful as a first screening, but do not allow for graded quantification of the manifested asymmetry in binocular vision. Moreover, they often concern only a rather selective range of binocular functions. The aim of the present study was to further differentiate eye preference within the context of other binocular functions as measured in standard optometric tests, and to validate their relation to questionnaire data of eyedness.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 3%
Finland 1 1%
Unknown 64 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 18%
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 9%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 9 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 21%
Psychology 10 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 9%
Engineering 5 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Other 16 24%
Unknown 12 18%