About Eye Tracking

 

The role of eye movements in dyslexia has been debated for many years. It is known from studies that dyslexics have an increase in the duration of fixations (the pauses that we make when reading) and that they make more backwards eye movements (called “regressions”). These are usually explained however as a manifestation of poor comprehension rather than as a primary abnormality of the eye movements themselves. Historically, this was demonstrated by a number of studies which showed little or no difference in eye movements between dyslexics and non-dyslexics.1,2,3 Although this has become the popular view, it is not supported using currently accepted methods for evaluating eye movements.

Pursuits Pursuit eye movements (eg. follow the ball on the end of a stick) are not often considered in the scientific literature on dyslexia since we do not use this type of eye movement to read a book. Nevertheless, large studies show a strong correlation between the quality of pursuit eye movements and reading difficulties in young children4,5,6 – an observation commonly made by optometrists and teachers. A possible explanation for this is the more recent understanding that pursuits and saccades (although distinctly different types of eye movements) are controlled by similar networks of cortical and sub-cortical regions in the brain, and in some cases even share the same neurons!7 Since the development of pursuit eye movements reach adult maturity earlier than saccades their predictive value based on observation alone rapidly diminishes beyond the early school years. The pictures below show how pursuit eye movements can look for a non-dyslexic child (blue) compared to a dyslexic child (red) when using the latest eye tracking technology.8

Saccades Saccadic eye movements are a more rapid type of eye movement and comprise of various subtypes including: voluntary saccades, corrective saccades, anticipatory saccades, reflex saccades and express saccades. Voluntary saccades, referred to by researchers as “anti-saccades” (as they are measured by asking the subject to look in the opposite direction of the test stimulus) are the type of saccades employed for reading text and include corrective saccades which are used when correcting saccade errors.

Voluntary Saccades Voluntary saccades are so named because they are controlled by the frontal and prefrontal structures in the brain associated with conscious decision making.9,10

Reflex Saccades By contrast, reflex saccades are controlled by the mid-brain region (eg. the Superior Colliculus) and are a response to rapidly moving stimuli in our peripheral vision (eg. a cricket ball coming from the side).

Fixation Fixations are the regular pauses that we make when we are reading (see diagram below or click on tracker for video demonstration). It is during each fixation period that visual information is processed and used for higher order processing in the brain. Fixation is an active process, and in order to make any kind of saccadic eye movement (voluntary or reflexive) requires suppression (ie. switching off) of the fixation mechanism.

It is argued that in order to determine if an ocular motor abnormality is associated with a specific learning disability, a large group must be assessed with objective eye movement recordings and an age matched control group performing academically well must be studied in exactly the same fashion.11 Such a study was done over 10 years ago involving around 1000 dyslexic children ages 7 to 17 years of age, utilizing a task that is independent of language12. Their findings show firstly a long developmental period for saccades to reach adult maturity in the normal population; up to about 17 years of age in the case of voluntary saccades and around 15 years of age in the case of reflex saccades. Secondly, a significant difference between dyslexics and non-dyslexics in the reaction time of reflex saccades is found for younger children (less than 9 years of age), and for older children (over 13 years of age) when making voluntary saccades. Thirdly, and most importantly, there is a significant difference in the control of voluntary eye movements between dyslexics and normal readers after the age of 7 (as shown by the higher error rate on the graph below) which continues to become greater with age relative to peers, a finding that has been confirmed by another study involving students ages 8 to 16 years of age.13 By around 20 years of age 80% of dyslexics exhibit a problem with the control of their voluntary saccades. It is interesting comparing a graph that shows how the eye tracking deficit changes with age with a graph that shows how achievement in a child with a learning disability changes with age (National Center of Learning Disabilities, 2011). In both cases the performance gap gets worse as the child gets older.

Ref: Perception, 2000 Ref: National Center of Learning Disabilities, 2011

Interestingly, similar problems with saccadic eye movement control have also been reported in children with ADD14,15, Aspergers16, mild closed head injury17,18 and a range of other neurological conditions not discussed in here. It is apparent that voluntary saccades are a very sensitive marker of frontal lobe dysfunction – even in the absence of other neurological signs.

The reason for the historical lack of significance in eye movements between dyslexics and their normal reading peers, can largely be attributable to the scientific methodology used. For example, until recently nearly all of the reported studies relating to saccadic eye movements in dyslexia, are limited to saccadic latencies (ie. reaction times) or amplitudes and do not investigate the control of voluntary saccades as measured by the number of errors made on an anti-saccade task. In the case of saccadic latencies, most studies involve children 9 to 13 years of age and we know (as discussed above) that differences are only found in saccadic latencies outside of these age ranges!

Finally, there is evidence to show that dyslexics have problems with both monocular and binocular fixation stability under 12 years of age.19,20,21,22 The idea of a problem with binocular fixation has been looked at by Professor John Stein of Oxford University who describes this condition as an “eye wobble” thought to be caused by a deficit in the magnocellular visual pathways23.

Training Eye Movements Once it has been established that a child has faulty eye movements it would be remiss not to consider whether these problems might be treatable, particularly when one considers that reading is such a strongly visual task. Not surprisingly, various treatments that usually involve some kind of regular eye movement training have been offered by optometrists for many years and are advocated by the American Optometry Association.24,25 Not everyone agrees however that the training of eye movements is scientifically supported as an efficacious treatment for dyslexia.26,27 The remainder of this article will consider the evidence that supports the training of eye movements, since there is little evidence to show that they cannot be trained.

There are relatively few studies in the mainstream literature to show that pursuit eye movements can be improved with training, and such studies are probably more likely to be found in clinical reports and journals.28,29,30 One such example is the report by the Reading & University Laboratory of Physiology at the Royal Berks Hospital, Oxford, in which an audit of treatments involving some 300 dyslexic children in their Learning Difficulties Clinic, showed that pursuits, saccades and convergence are all significantly improved with training leading to improvements in reading of around 2 months/per month; a result that compares favorably with traditional approaches.31

By comparison, there are numerous clinical and research studies demonstrating that saccadic eye movements can be trained to – if not close to – age normal levels,32,33,34,35,36 and that training has a positive effect on academic outcomes, including children with developmental dyslexia.37,38,39,40,41,42 One such article, by the Optomotor Laboratory Brain Research Group in Germany, shows that voluntary saccadic eye movements can be improved by over ten times their natural rate of development following 10 minutes of daily training, using a small hand held device for a period of 3 to 8 weeks.32 This cannot be attributable to a placebo effect since the same device used for training reflex saccades has no such affect.

Ref: Optometry & Vision Development, 2008

Such a treatment can result in a 50% average reduction in reading errors compared to only a 20% reduction with controls (see graph). Both groups received 6 weeks of formal reading instruction.37 Similarly, a randomized placebo controlled study by Stein showed that binocular stability can be improved in dyslexics with monocular occlusion therapy resulting in significant reading gains for dyslexic children.43 Although the use of the Dunlop Test to determine binocular stability has been questioned44, similar findings have been reported by other researchers. One such finding showed that alternate monocular occlusion can reduce binocular fixation instability by around 55%.45-48

Summary There now exists a growing body of evidence to demonstrate that eye movement dysfunction, both in terms of voluntary saccadic control, binocular fixation stability and also saccadic latencies in the younger and older student populations, significantly contributes towards the dysfunction of developmental dyslexia. Such a finding is not surprising when one considers the kinds of problems frequently observed in dyslexics including skipping letters or words, losing place and difficulty with visual search activities. These problems cannot be solely attributed to a primary language disorder as has previously been held to be the case. Indeed had this been understood much earlier the intervention for dyslexia would probably look quite different today given the dominant role of vision in reading.

The oculomotor dysfunctions observed in dyslexia may possibly be explained in terms of a magnocellular (M-pathway) deficit due to the high number of magnocellular projections into the brain structures responsible for the control of voluntary eye movements. Furthermore, it has previously been established that the magnocellular pathways of dyslexics have both anatomical and functional abnormalities in the lateral geniculate nucleus, extrastriate visual cortex Area MT/V5 and parietal regions.46,47,48 My purpose however, is not to present a neurobiological basis for dyslexia but to demonstrate the importance of diagnosing eye movement disorders in children failing to progress at school despite having received appropriate instruction, especially when a diagnosis of dyslexia has been made. In my experience, these problems can usually be improved to age normal levels with reported gains in academic performance. The interventions for improving eye movements should not be considered as a replacement for traditional therapies, however a combination of non-linguistic treatments such as eye movement training, together with more traditional approaches is the most likely to be effective. This also provides educators with another approach to treatment which could be particularly helpful when traditional therapies are failing. The argument against training on the basis of cost fails to compare this against the cost of delivering existing strategies, not to mention the financial and social cost of failing to remediate the child with a serious learning problem such as dyslexia.

REFERENCES
1. Brown B, Haegerstrom-Portnoy G, Yingling C.D, Herron J, Galin D, Marcus M. Tracking eye movements are normal in dyslexic children. American Journal of Optometry & Physiological Optics 1983, 60(5): 376-383.
2. Stanley G, Smith G, Howell E.A. Eye-movements and sequential tracking in dyslexic and control children. British Journal of Psychology 1983, 74:181-187.

3. Black JL, Collins DW, De Roach JN, Zubrick S. A detailed study of sequential saccadic eye movements for normal –and poor reading children. Perceptual Motor Skills 1984, 59(2):423-434.

4. Eden GF, Stein JF, Wood HM, Wood, FB. Differences in eye movement and reading problems in dyslexic and normal children. Vision Research 34 (10): 1345-1358, 1994.dfsa

5. Eden G, Stein J, Wood M, Wood F. Verbal and visual problems in reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities 28 (5): 272-290. 1995.

6. Callu D, Giannopulu I, Escolano S, Cusin F, Jacquier-Roux M, Dellatolas G. Smooth pursuit eye movements are associated with phonological awareness in preschool children. Brain and Cognition 2005;58:217-225.

7. Krauzlis RJ. The control of voluntary eye movements: New perspectives. Neuroscientist 2005; 11(2):124–137.

8. Haseloff A. University of Hohenheim. www.slideshare.net/Tobii/dyslexia-and-eye-tracking.
9. Everling S, Fischer B. The anti-saccade: a review of the basic research and clinical studies. Neuropsychologia 1998, 36(9):885-899.

10. Rosano C, Krisky CM, Welling JS, Eddy WF, Luna B, Thulborn KR, Sweeney JA. Pursuit and saccadic eye movement subregions in human frontal eye field: A high resolution fMRI investigation. Cerebral Cortex 2002, 12:107-115.

11. Hoyt CS. Visual training and reading. Am Orthopt J, 1999;49:23-25

12. Biscaldi M, Fischer B, Hartnegg K. Voluntary saccadic control in dyslexia. Perception 2000, 29:509-521.
13. Fukushima J, Tanaka S, Williams JD, Fukushima K. Voluntary control of saccadic and smooth-pursuit eye movements in children with learning disorders. Brain and Development 2005, 27(8): 579-588.
14. Mostofsky SH, Lasker AG, Cutting LE, Denckla MB, Zee DS. Oculomotor abnormalities in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. A preliminary study. Neurology 2001;57:423-430
15. Munoz DP, Armstrong IT, Hampton KA, Moore KD. Altered control of visual fixation and saccadic eye movements in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. I Neurophyisol 2003;10:1152
16. Manoach DS, Lindgren KA, Barton JJS. Deficient saccadic inhibition in Asperger’s disorder and the social-emotional processing disorder. Journal of Neurology and Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 2004, 75:1719-1726.
17. Marcus HH, Anderson TJ, Jones RD, Dalrymple-Alford JC, Frampton CM, Ardagh MW. Eye movement and visuomotor arm movement deficits following mild closed head injury. Brain 2004, 127(3):575-590.
18. Mosimann UP, MuriRM, Felblinger J, Radanov BP. Saccadic eye movement disturbances in whiplash patients with persistent complaints. Brain 2000, 123(4):828-835.
19. Fischer B, Hartnegg K. Stability of gaze control in dyslexia. Strabismus 2000:8:119-122

20. Stein JF, Fowler MS. Unstable binocular control in children with specific reading retardation. J Res Reading 1993, 16:30-45.

21. Kapoula Z, Ganem R, Poncet S, Gintautas D, Bremond-Gignac D. Poor binocular yoking of the saccades independently from reading in dyslexic children. Perception 2006: 35 ECVP Abstract Supplement

22. Bucci MP, Bremond-Gignac D, Kapoula Z. Poor binocular co-ordination of saccades in dyslexic children. Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology 2007, On-Line First.
23. Stein JF, Talcott JB. The magnocellular theory of developmental dyslexia. Dyslexia 1999, 5:59-78.
24. The 1986/87 Future of Visual Development/Performance Task Force. Special Report: The efficacy of optometric vision therapy. Journal American Optometry Association 1988, 59:95-105

25. VISION, LEARNING AND DYSLEXIA: A JOINT ORGANIZATIONAL POLICY STATEMENT by the American Academy of Optometry & the American Optometric Association 2000, Appendix 51-56. [http://www. aoa.org/documents/CPG-20.pdf]

26. Rawston JA, Burley CD, Elder JE. A systematic review of the applicability and efficacy of eye exercises. Invest Ophthal 2005, 42(2):82-88.

27. American Academy of Pediatrics, American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, American Academy of Ophthalmology. Position statement on learning disabilities, dyslexia, add/adhd and vision. Pediatrics 1992, 90(1): 124-125.

28. Wold, RM, Pierce JR, Keddington J. Effectiveness of optometric vision therapy. Journal of the American Optometric Association 1978, 49:1047-1059.

29. Punnett AF, Steinhauer GD. Relationship between reinforcement and eye movements during ocular motor training with learning disabled children. J Learn Disabilities 1984; 17: 16-9.
30. Han Y, Ciuffreda KJ, Kapoor N. Reading-related oculomotor testing and training protocols for acquired brain injury in humans. Brain Research Protoc. 2004, 14(1):1-12.
31. Clisby C, Fowler MS, Hebb GS, Walters J, Southcott P, Stein JF. Outcome of treatment of visual problems in children with reading difficulties. Professional Association of Teachers in Special Situations (PATOSS), Bulletin Nov.2000, 9-14.
32. Fischer B, Hartnegg K. Effects of visual training on saccade control in dyslexia. Perception 2000;29(5):531-542.

33. Dyckman KA and McDowell JE. Behavioral plasticity of antisaccade performance following daily practice. Experimental Brain Research, 2005:162(1); 63-69

34. Temple E, Deutsch GK, Poldrack RA, Miller SL, Tallal P, Merzenich MM, Gabrieli JDE. Neural deficits in children with dyslexia ameliorated by behavioural remediation: Evidence from functional MRI. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2003, 100(5): 2860-2865.

35. Karatekin, Canan. Improving antisaccade performance in adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Experimental Brain Research 2006, 174(2): 324-341(18)
36. Kveraga K, boucher L, Hughes H. Learning to look the other way. Journal of Vision Abstract 2002;2(7):172a
37. Fischer B, Hartnegg K. Saccade control in dyslexia: development, deficits, training and transfer to reading. Optom Vis Dev 2008, 39(4):196-205.
38. Atzmon D, Nemet P, Ishay A, Karni E. A randomized prospective masked and matched comparative study of orthoptic treatment versus conventional reading tutoring treatment for reading disabilities in 62 Children. Binocular Vision and Eye. Muscle Surgery Quarterly 8 (2): 91-106, 1993.
39. Solan H, Larson S, Shelley-Tremblay J, Ficarra A, Silverman M. Role of visual attention in cognitive control of oculomotor readiness in students with reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities 2001, 34(2):107-118

40. Cotti J, Guillaume A, Alahyane N, Pelisson D, Vercher JL. Adaptation of voluntary saccades, but not reflexive saccades, transfers to hand pointing movements. Journal of Neurophysiology 2007, 98:602-612.

41. Goss DA, Downing DB, Lowther AH, Horner DG, Blemker M, Donaldson L, Malsom T, Gray KH. The effect of HTS vision therapy conducted in a school setting on reading skills in third and fourth grade students. Optom Vis Dev 2007;38(1):27-32.

42. Brodney AC, Pozil R, Mallinson K, Kehoe P. Vision Therapy in a School Setting. Journal of Behavioral Optometry 2001, 12(4):99-103.

43. Stein JF, Richardson AJ, Fowler MS. Monocular occlusion can improve binocular control and reading in dyslexics. Brain 2000, 123:164-170.

44. Fawcett, A. J. Mono-ocular Occlusion for Treatment of Dyslexia. The Lancet 2000, 356, 89-90.

45. Fischer B, Hartnegg K. Instability of fixation in dyslexia: development – deficits – training. Optom Vis Dev 2009, 40(4):221-228.

46. Stein JF, Walsh V. To see but not to read; the magnocellular theory of dyslexia. Trends in Neuroscience 1997, 20:147-152.

47. Livingstone MS, Rosen GD, Drislane FW, Galaburda AM. Physiological and anatomical evidence for a magnocellular defect in developmental dyslexia. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1991, 88:7943–7

48. Demb JB, Boynton GM, Heeger DJ. Functional magnetic resonance imaging of early visual pathways in dyslexia. The Journal of Neuroscience 1998, 18(17):6939-6951.