Low correlation between visual discomfort image ratings and hypersensitivity questions is improved with functional questions

IF 1.5 4区心理学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES

Vision Research Pub Date : 2025-02-04 DOI:10.1016/j.visres.2025.108551

Alice Price, Georgina Powell, Petroc Sumner

{"title":"Low correlation between visual discomfort image ratings and hypersensitivity questions is improved with functional questions","authors":"Alice Price, Georgina Powell, Petroc Sumner","doi":"10.1016/j.visres.2025.108551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>To assess visual discomfort, researchers can use questionnaires that require people to self-reflect on their real-world experiences, or researchers can present images and ask for ratings of discomfort while they are viewed. These two methods are conceptualised to measure a similar construct, but they tend to show surprisingly low correlation. A possible reason is that, when viewing the images, people do not know how to calibrate their answers on a standard discomfort scale, because it requires implicit comparison of one’s own perception with others (e.g., <em>is my perception unusually uncomfortable?).</em> Here we compared standard discomfort ratings with functional questions that aimed to aid calibration (e.g. <em>I would need to immediately look away; I could tolerate it as a poster; I could live with it as wallpaper</em>). We found correlation with questionnaire questions about stripes and patterns improved with the functional style of question. We conclude that functional questions are helpful for assessing visual discomfort.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23670,"journal":{"name":"Vision Research","volume":"228 ","pages":"Article 108551"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vision Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0042698925000124","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

To assess visual discomfort, researchers can use questionnaires that require people to self-reflect on their real-world experiences, or researchers can present images and ask for ratings of discomfort while they are viewed. These two methods are conceptualised to measure a similar construct, but they tend to show surprisingly low correlation. A possible reason is that, when viewing the images, people do not know how to calibrate their answers on a standard discomfort scale, because it requires implicit comparison of one’s own perception with others (e.g., is my perception unusually uncomfortable?). Here we compared standard discomfort ratings with functional questions that aimed to aid calibration (e.g. I would need to immediately look away; I could tolerate it as a poster; I could live with it as wallpaper). We found correlation with questionnaire questions about stripes and patterns improved with the functional style of question. We conclude that functional questions are helpful for assessing visual discomfort.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

视觉不适图像评分与超敏问题之间的低相关性随着功能问题得到改善

为了评估视觉不适，研究人员可以使用调查问卷，要求人们对自己的现实世界经历进行自我反思，或者研究人员可以展示图像，并在观看时要求人们对视觉不适进行评分。这两种方法被概念化来测量类似的结构，但它们往往显示出令人惊讶的低相关性。一个可能的原因是，当观看这些图像时，人们不知道如何根据标准的不适程度来校准他们的答案，因为这需要将自己的感知与他人进行隐性比较（例如，我的感知是否异常不舒服？）在这里，我们将标准的不适等级与旨在帮助校准的功能性问题(例如，我需要立即转移视线；我可以容忍它是一张海报；我可以把它当墙纸用)。我们发现条纹和图案与问卷问题的相关性随着问题的功能风格而提高。我们的结论是，功能问题有助于评估视觉不适。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Vision Research 医学-神经科学

CiteScore

3.70

自引率

16.70%

发文量

111

审稿时长

66 days

期刊介绍： Vision Research is a journal devoted to the functional aspects of human, vertebrate and invertebrate vision and publishes experimental and observational studies, reviews, and theoretical and computational analyses. Vision Research also publishes clinical studies relevant to normal visual function and basic research relevant to visual dysfunction or its clinical investigation. Functional aspects of vision is interpreted broadly, ranging from molecular and cellular function to perception and behavior. Detailed descriptions are encouraged but enough introductory background should be included for non-specialists. Theoretical and computational papers should give a sense of order to the facts or point to new verifiable observations. Papers dealing with questions in the history of vision science should stress the development of ideas in the field.