Raphael Barbeito

Effects of luminance on the visual acuity of strabismic and anisometropic amblyopes and optically blurred normals

Evidence is accumulating to suggest fundamental differences between strabismic and anisometropic amblyopia. We explored differences in these amblyopes by assessing the effects of luminance on optotype acuity, using targets that ranged from photopic to low mesopic levels. Our results show that reducing luminance has less of a detrimental effect on the acuity of strabismic than anisometropic amblyopic eyes. Furthermore, the effect of decreasing luminance on the acuity of optically blurred normal eyes mimicked the effect we found for anisometropic amblyopic eyes. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that the fundamental deficit in anisometropic amblyopia is impaired resolution while in strabismic amblyopia the fundamental deficit is impaired spatial directionalization.

The relationship between eye position and egocentric visual direction

Hering’s model of egocentric visual direction assumes implicitly that the effect of eye position on direction is both linear and equal for the two eyes; these two assumptions were evaluated in the present experiment. Five subjects pointed (open-loop) to the apparent direction of a target seen under conditions in which the position of one eye was systematically varied while the position of the other eye was held constant. The data were analyzed through examination of the relationship between the variations in perceived egocentric direction and variations inexpected egocentric direction based on the positions of the varying eye. The data revealed that the relationship between eye position and egocentric direction is indeed linear. Further, the data showed that, for some subjects, variations in the positions of the two eyes do not have equateffectsTjn egocentric direction. Both the between-eye differences and the linear relationship may be understood in terms of individual differences in the location of the cyclopean eye, an unequal weighting of the positions of the eyes in the processing of egocentric direction, or some combination of these two factors.

Problem of between-eye correlation for statistical hypothesis testing: rabbit corneal thickness.

The two eyes of a subject often yield correlated data. Statistical analysis which treats correlated data as if it were independent is most likely to be biased toward statistical significance; that is, the probability of a type I error is likely to be inflated. To illustrate the importance of lack of independence to the inferential process, data from an experimental design commonly used in optometric research are used to demonstrate (1) the potential magnitude of between-eye correlation, (2) the statistical bias toward a significant outcome when the between-eye correlation is ignored via inappropriate analysis, and (3) simple ways by which the bias can be avoided. The researcher must be aware of the between-eye correlation which exists for the particular effect under study, and the statistical bias that ensues from the correlation when the data are not handled correctly.

Precision and accuracy of oculocentric direction for targets of different luminances

The precision and accuracy of specifying oculocentric directions were assessed by successively partitioning an 8.3° space in the right field into a series of perceptually equal fractional spaces and then matching each partitioning target’s direction in the left field. Three observers performed this task for four target luminances, ranging from 0.04 to 43 cd/m2. The results show that luminance has virtually no effect on either the precision or accuracy of spatial partitioning; essentially no effect was obtained even when, for one observer, target luminance was reduced to nearly the absolute threshold. We interpret these data in terms of oculocentric direction’s role in mediating visual behaviors.

Visual localization of briefly presented peripheral targets

Reported here are the results from two experiments designed to investigate Mateeff and Gourevichs (1983, 1984) claim that adult observers make large constant errors when judging the direction of briefly presented peripheral targets, with respect to a continuously visible scale. Experiment 1 involved a virtually exact duplication of Mateeff and Gourevichs paradigm. Experiment 2 involved adjusting the position of a light emitting diode (LED) so as to match the direction of a LED previously flashed in the periphery. No significant constant errors were found in either experiment.

THE EFFECT OF OPTICAL BLUR ON VISUAL ACUITY FOR TARGETS OF DIFFERENT LUMINANCES

Abstract— We studied the effect of 1.25 D of optical blur on visual acuity at luminances ranging from photopic to low mesopic levels. Optical blur reduces acuity at all luminances tested, this reduction being fourfold at a high photopic level (170 cd m‐2) and twofold in low mesopia (0.017 cd m‐2). The reduction of visual acuity with blur at low luminances is greater than might be expected from a spatial frequency analysis of vision.

Clinical assessment of ocular response to a multipurpose contact lens care solution

The issue of possible adverse effects of contact lens care solutions on ocular health has been raised in the literature. Possible effects of a multipurpose contact lens care solution (Bausch & Lomb ReNu®) on eight measures of ocular function were evaluated relative to the effects of physiological saline (Bausch & Lomb Sensitive Eyes®). In a randomized, two‐treatment, crossover design, all subjects were treated with each of the two solutions on successive weeks. In 73 subjects, comprised of contact lens and non‐lens wearers, tear break‐up time was measured using the keratometer mire and fluorescein techniques. Measures of autonomic function were vertical palpebral aperture size, amplitude of accommodation, intraocular pressure, pupil size, conjunctival injection, and pupil reactivity. The results indicated that this multipurpose solution provoked no adverse ocular response as determined by the tear break‐up time and autonomic functions, and the multipurpose solution was clinically equivalent to physiological saline. These results apply to both contact lens wearers and non‐lens wearers. Additional findings speak of the unreliability of the fluorescein method for measuring tear break‐up time.

Should level of measurement considerations affect the choice of statistic

The belief that the level of measurement (nominal, ordinal, interval, ratio) achieved in the data constrains the type of statistic that may be used legitimately for analysis is examined in general, and in an optometric-vision science context. Theoretical considerations indicate that statistical statements about the data may be made independently of the level of measurement, and that although researchers must be concerned about the quality of their measurement, the role of measurement theory is in the interpretation of the meaning of the investigations results as a whole not in the governance of the choice of statistic. Empirical studies indicate that measurement considerations can be ignored for the purposes of testing the null hypothesis with little or no resultant error. Finally, adherence to the belief that level of measurement considerations limits statistical choice would result in the use of generally less powerful statistical tests--an undesirable and, all things considered, an unwarranted consequence.

Stereo-deficients and stereoblinds cannot make utrocular discriminations

In two separate experiments, we show that stereo-deficient observers are no better than stereonormals at discriminating the eye-of-origin of a monocular stimulation. Stereo-deficient observers are considered to have a preponderance of monocular neurons throughout their visual system, including the visual cortex. The results indicate that, in spite of their clear anatomical and physiological structure, such monocular neurons do not convey eye-of-origin information to consciousness.

Differences between objective and subjective refractions after radial keratotomy.

BACKGROUND In patients who are free of pathology, automatic refractions have shown close agreement with the subjective refractions. Clinical experience indicated that the normally strong relationship between objective and subjective refraction is significantly weakened as a result of radial keratotomy. METHODS Seventy-two patients were refracted before and after surgery, objectively with a Humphrey Model #510 autorefractor and subjectively using a binocular refraction procedure without cycloplegia. All patients were free of ocular disease and had preoperative myopia ranging from -1.00 to -9.00 diopters as determined by the subjective spherical equivalent. RESULTS The results indicated that the preoperative difference between the mean spherical automatic and subjective refractions was a clinically acceptable 0.25 diopter. However, postoperatively, there was a statistically significant difference of 1.25 D with the automatic refractor determining more myopic refractions. Subsequent analysis revealed that the age of the patient had a direct bearing on this finding with patients less than 40 years of age showing more minus in the automatic refraction than patients 40 years and older. CONCLUSIONS The postoperative discrepancy between the two refractions may be explained by induced optical aberrations and may contribute towards the visual fluctuations experienced by radial keratotomy patients. It is postulated that the inconsistency in refractive determination is due to optical distortion since the age dependence of this effect may be related to the reduction of pupil size that occurs with aging. In the radial keratotomy patient, the practitioner is faced with a more complex and uncertain refraction that may vary according to refractive procedures used and other factors such as pupil size.