Purpose: To report on differences between the latency distributions of responses to stimuli and to false-positive catch trials in suprathreshold perimetry. To describe an algorithm for defining response time windows and to report on its performance in discriminating between true- and false-positive responses on the basis of response time (RT).
Methods: A sample of 435 largely inexperienced patients underwent suprathreshold visual field examination on a perimeter that was modified to record RTs. Data were analyzed from 60,500 responses to suprathreshold stimuli and from 523 false-positive responses to catch trials.
Results: False-positive responses had much more variable latencies than responses to suprathreshold stimuli. An algorithm defining RT windows on the basis of z-transformed individual latency samples correctly identified more than 70% of false-positive responses to catch trials, whereas fewer than 3% of responses to suprathreshold stimuli were classified as false-positive responses.
Conclusions: Latency analysis can be used to detect a substantial proportion of false-positive responses in suprathreshold perimetry. Rejection of such responses may increase the reliability of visual field screening by reducing variability and bias in a small but clinically important proportion of patients.