Hi all, does anyone know of some publication/experimental design in which some stimuli have resulted in a double peak in pupil size?
Hi @user-98789c , in Urai et al. (2017), https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14637 , Figure 3A you can see a similar pattern for some of the conditions. Similarly, in de Gee et al. (2014), https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1317557111, see Figure 2. Check also this paper where the authors are providing some explanations as for the double peak response they observed https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8683032/
this is really helpful, thanks a lot @user-480f4c 😊
Hi Pupil-Labs, your new glasses look stunning. Unfortunately, I did not have the chance to hold it myself, but hope to have a chance soon! #soooo_slick!
👋 Hi @user-a79410! Congrats for your publication and thanks for sharing it with us. 🙏 🚀
as for your publication record, please add 10.1167/tvst.12.2.28 "Objective Quantification and Topographic Dioptric Demand of Near-Work" an important work in the space myopia etiology that presents empirical data of the dioptric environment that are eyes exposed to during near-work task. Feel free to contact me for any further infos! Best Peter
@user-98789c Hi! Can you share how did you interpret or handled the double peak?? I'm also having similar result with the data from pupil labs device. I also wonder if there is an pupil labs library that filters these data..?
Hi Jinwook, sorry for the late reply. As I went through the papers @user-480f4c kindly referred to, I realized it's normal to get these double peaks in experiments like mine, so my confusion was already taken care of. But I have also done an Anova-like comparison of my experimental conditions against a global mean, where I calculated the mean pupil size over all the conditions and subtracted this global mean from each condition. Then, I didn't see the double peaks anymore. I think you can take this approach too.