Useful Field of View Test (UFOV)

Background

The Useful Field of View Test (UFOV) is a measure of information processing speed and (divided) attention. It determines how much visual information can be localized, taken in and processed in cluttered environments in a short amount of time. The UFOV is often used as a cognitive function assessment test for driving performance in older adults as low performance on the UFOV has been consistently shown to correlate with increased accident proneness. The test was originally developed and validated by Karlene Ball and colleagues in 1987. Commercialized versions of the test are available.

The basic UFOV task presents a visual display of little shapes that are arranged methodically on three concentric circles around a center, simulating an expanding (and cluttered) field of view around the center. Two stimuli are added to the display for shorter and shorter durations: a center stimulus (e.g. a smiley or a frowny face) and a peripheral stimulus (always a smiley face) that can be placed anywhere on the three concentric circles. The task after each presentation is twofold. First, participants have to identify the center stimulus (was it a smiley or a frowny face?), which forces them to keep their attention on the center, and second, participants have to pinpoint the location of the peripheral stimulus. By shortening the duration of the center and peripheral stimulus, the level of task difficulty increases steadily.

In 2005, Jerri Edwards and colleagues tested a shortened design of the UFOV test that could be administered on personal computers, circumventing the need for specifialized testing equipment and making the test more portable for clinical settings. They found that performance on the shorter task on personal computers with mouse and/or touch responses correlated highly with performance on the standard UFOV at the time as well as with each other, making the shorter mouse/touch task a practical option for clinical testing settings.

Three subtests of the shortened UFOV test measure an individual’s speed of processing across increasingly complex visual displays. Each of those subtests estimates an individual's stimulus duration threshold (via a staircase procedure) that is needed to perform the task with 75% accuracy. The subtests get progressively more difficult.

1. Subtest 1: Presents only the central stimulus. The task is to identify the central stimulus (car vs. truck)
2. Subtest 2: Presents the central stimulus as well as the peripheral stimulus (without added distractors). The task is to identify the central stimulus (car vs. truck) and identify the location of the peripheral stimulus.
3. Subtest 3: Presents the central stimulus as well as the peripheral stimulus (with added distractors). The task is to identify the central stimulus (car vs. truck) and identify the location of the peripheral stimulus.

Task Procedure

The participant works through each subtest, one at a time. In all subtests, the stimuli are presented for a short duration and are then erased by a masking stimulus that is displayed for 500ms before the task questions appear. For each subtest, the 75% accuracy duration threshold is estimated by an adaptive staircase procedure. The maximum duration that the stimuli are presented is 500ms. The lowest is determined by the refreshrate of the current device (on 60Hz monitor -> 16.67ms). The duration is continuously updated based on performance via an adaptive staircase procedure until the 75% accuracy treshold can be determined or the maximum/minimum duration has been used for 3 consecutive trials. If a participant fails a subtest (threshold is the max. duration tested), the test stops automatically. Each subtest is preceded by a short practice session.

Subtest 1

The participant is presented a car or a truck stimulus in the center of the screen for a short period of time, followed by a masking stimulus (500ms). The participant is then asked to make a choice between the car or truck stimulus by either selecting the stimulus with the mouse or by touch (on touchscreen devices).

Subtest 2

Subtest 2 is similar to subtest1 with the added peripheral stimulus being presented at the same time. The participant is then asked to a) make a choice between the car or truck stimulus by either selecting the stimulus with the mouse or by touch and b) select the location axis of the peripheral stimulus by clicking on of the eight possible axes.

Subtest 3

Subtest 3 is similar to subtest2 with the peripheral stimulus being presented among a number of distractors (triangles).

What it Measures

The Useful Field of View Test (UFOV) is a measure of information processing speed and (divided) attention.

Psychological domains

• Processing Speed: Recognizing a central object (e.g., a car or truck).
• Divided Attention: Identifying the central object while also locating a target in the periphery.
• Selective Attention: Performing the divided attention task while filtering out distracting visual information.

Main Performance Metrics

• Subtest 1 Threshold: the estimated 75% accuracy duration threshold (in ms) of subtest 1; measure of simple processing speed
• Subtest 2 Threshold: the estimated 75% accuracy duration threshold (in ms) of subtest 2; measure of processing speed under divided attention
• Subtest 2 Threshold: the estimated 75% accuracy duration threshold (in ms) of subtest 3; measure of processing speed under divided attention with additional need to filter out distracting information

Psychiatric Conditions

The following patient groups have been tested with UFOV Test

• Dementia & Alzheimer's Disease
• Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI)
• Stroke
• Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)
• Parkinson's Disease
• Multiple Sclerosis (MS)
• Schizophrenia

References

Search Google Scholar for peer-reviewed, published research using the Inquisit Useful Field of View Test (UFOV).

---

Ball, K., Beard, B., Roenker, D., Miller, R., & Griggs, D. (1988). Age and visual search: Expanding the useful field of view. Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and Image Science, 5(12), 2210-9.

Edwards, J. D., Vance, D. E., Wadley, V. G., Cissell, G. M., Roenker, D. L., & Ball, K. K. (2005). Reliability and validity of useful field of view test scores as administered by personal computer. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 27, 529–543.