Scoring reading parameters: An inter-rater reliability study using the MNREAD chart.

PURPOSE: First, to evaluate inter-rater reliability when human raters estimate the reading performance of visually impaired individuals using the MNREAD acuity chart. Second, to evaluate the agreement between computer-based scoring algorithms and compare them with human rating. METHODS: Reading performance was measured for 101 individuals with low vision, using the Portuguese version of the MNREAD test. Seven raters estimated the maximum reading speed (MRS) and critical print size (CPS) of each individual MNREAD curve. MRS and CPS were also calculated automatically for each curve using two different algorithms: the original standard deviation method (SDev) and a non-linear mixed effects (NLME) modeling. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to estimate absolute agreement between raters and/or algorithms. RESULTS: Absolute agreement between raters was 'excellent' for MRS (ICC = 0.97; 95%CI [0.96, 0.98]) and 'moderate' to 'good' for CPS (ICC = 0.77; 95%CI [0.69, 0.83]). For CPS, inter-rater reliability was poorer among less experienced raters (ICC = 0.70; 95%CI [0.57, 0.80]) when compared to experienced ones (ICC = 0.82; 95%CI [0.76, 0.88]). Absolute agreement between the two algorithms was 'excellent' for MRS (ICC = 0.96; 95%CI [0.91, 0.98]). For CPS, the best possible agreement was found for CPS defined as the print size sustaining 80% of MRS (ICC = 0.77; 95%CI [0.68, 0.84]). Absolute agreement between raters and automated methods was 'excellent' for MRS (ICC = 0.96; 95% CI [0.88, 0.98] for SDev; ICC = 0.97; 95% CI [0.95, 0.98] for NLME). For CPS, absolute agreement between raters and SDev ranged from 'poor' to 'good' (ICC = 0.66; 95% CI [0.3, 0.80]), while agreement between raters and NLME was 'good' (ICC = 0.83; 95% CI [0.76, 0.88]). CONCLUSION: For MRS, inter-rater reliability is excellent, even considering the possibility of noisy and/or incomplete data collected in low-vision individuals. For CPS, inter-rater reliability is lower. This may be problematic, for instance in the context of multisite investigations or follow-up examinations. The NLME method showed better agreement with the raters than the SDev method for both reading parameters. Setting up consensual guidelines to deal with ambiguous curves may help improve reliability. While the exact definition of CPS should be chosen on a case-by-case basis depending on the clinician or researcher's motivations, evidence suggests that estimating CPS as the smallest print size sustaining about 80% of MRS would increase inter-rater reliability.

Baseline MNREAD Measures for Normally Sighted Subjects From Childhood to Old Age.

PURPOSE: The continuous-text reading-acuity test MNREAD is designed to measure the reading performance of people with normal and low vision. This test is used to estimate maximum reading speed (MRS), critical print size (CPS), reading acuity (RA), and the reading accessibility index (ACC). Here we report the age dependence of these measures for normally sighted individuals, providing baseline data for MNREAD testing. METHODS: We analyzed MNREAD data from 645 normally sighted participants ranging in age from 8 to 81 years. The data were collected in several studies conducted by different testers and at different sites in our research program, enabling evaluation of robustness of the test. RESULTS: Maximum reading speed and reading accessibility index showed a trilinear dependence on age: first increasing from 8 to 16 years (MRS: 140-200 words per minute [wpm]; ACC: 0.7-1.0); then stabilizing in the range of 16 to 40 years (MRS: 200 ± 25 wpm; ACC: 1.0 ± 0.14); and decreasing to 175 wpm and 0.88 by 81 years. Critical print size was constant from 8 to 23 years (0.08 logMAR), increased slowly until 68 years (0.21 logMAR), and then more rapidly until 81 years (0.34 logMAR). logMAR reading acuity improved from -0.1 at 8 years to -0.18 at 16 years, then gradually worsened to -0.05 at 81 years. CONCLUSIONS: We found a weak dependence of the MNREAD parameters on age in normal vision. In broad terms, MNREAD performance exhibits differences between three age groups: children 8 to 16 years, young adults 16 to 40 years, and middle-aged to older adults >40 years.

Contrast polarity differences reduce crowding but do not benefit reading performance in peripheral vision.

Previous studies have shown that the spatial extent of crowding in peripheral vision is reduced when a target letter and its flanking letters have opposite contrast polarity. We have examined if this reduction in crowding leads to improved reading performance. We compared the spatial extent of crowding, visual-span profiles (plots of letter-recognition accuracy versus letter position), and reading speed at 10 degrees inferior visual field, using white letters, black letters, or mixtures of white and black letters, presented on a mid-gray background. Consistent with previous studies, the spatial extent of crowding was reduced when the target and flanking letters had opposite contrast polarity. However, using mixed contrast polarity did not lead to improvements in visual-span profiles or reading speed.

Lost in virtual space: studies in human and ideal spatial navigation.

The authors describe 3 human spatial navigation experiments that investigate how limitations of perception, memory, uncertainty, and decision strategy affect human spatial navigation performance. To better understand the effect of these variables on human navigation performance, the authors developed an ideal-navigator model for indoor navigation whose optimizing algorithm uses a partially observable Markov decision process. The model minimizes the number of actions (translations and rotations) required to move from an unknown starting state to a specific goal state in indoor environments that have perceptual ambiguity. The authors compared the model's performance with that of the human observer to measure human navigation efficiency. Experiment 1 investigated the effect of increasing the layout size on spatial way-finding efficiency and found that participants' efficiencies decreased as layout size increased. The authors investigated whether this reduction in navigation efficiency was due to visual perception (Experiment 2), memory, spatial updating strategy, or decision strategy (Experiment 3).

The effect of print size on reading speed in dyslexia.

This article details a study which predicted that across a wide range of print sizes dyslexic reading would follow the same curve shape as skilled reading, with constant reading rates across large print sizes and a sharp decline in reading rates below a critical print size. It also predicted that dyslexic readers would require larger critical print sizes to attain their maximum reading speeds, following the letter position coding deficit hypothesis. Reading speed was measured across twelve print sizes ranging from Snellen equivalents of 20/12 to 20/200 letter sizes for a group of dyslexic readers in Grades 2 to 4 (aged 7 to 10 years), and for non-dyslexic readers in Grades 1 to 3 (aged 6 to 8 years). The groups were equated for word reading ability. Results confirmed that reading rate-by-print size curves followed the same two-limbed shape for dyslexic and non-dyslexic readers. Dyslexic reading curves showed higher critical print sizes and shallower reading rate-by-print size slopes below the critical print size, consistent with the hypothesis of a letter-position coding deficit. Non-dyslexic reading curves also showed a decrease of critical print size with age. A developmental lag model of dyslexic reading does not account for the results, since the regression of critical print size on maximum reading rate differed between groups.

Mr. Chips 2002: new insights from an ideal-observer model of reading.

The integration of visual, lexical, and oculomotor information is a critical part of reading. Mr. Chips is an ideal-observer model that combines these sources of information optimally to read simple texts in the minimum number of saccades. This model provides a computational framework for interpreting human reading saccades in both normal and low vision. The purpose of this paper is to report performance of the model for conditions emulating reading with normal vision--a visual span of nine characters, multiplicative saccade noise with a standard deviation of 30%, and texts based on three full-length children's books. Comparison of fixation locations by humans and Mr. Chips revealed: (1) that both exhibit very similar word-skipping behavior; (2) both show initial fixations near the center of words, but with a systematic difference suggestive of an asymmetry in the human visual span; and (3) differences in the pattern of refixations within words that may uncover non-optimal lexical inference by human readers. A human context effect--30% difference in mean saccade size between continuous text and random sequences of words--was very similar to the 25% effect for the model associated with a corresponding difference in the predictability of text words. Overall, our findings show that many of the complicated aspects of human reading saccades can be explained concisely by early information-processing constraints.