Effect of pupil size on steady state accommodation

Experiments are described in which monocular accommodation response/stimulus curves were measured with Snellen targets over the stimulus range from +1.0 to -5.0 D, using artificial pupils with diameters of 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5 and 3.0 mm and a constant retinal illuminance of 600 td. The results agree with those of earlier authors in showing a diminished response with smaller pupils. The slopes of the quasi-linear central portions of the response/stimulus curves are well described in terms of a geometrical optical approximation in which the accommodation system works to produce a retinal blur circle whose diameter is a linear function of the dioptric difference between the magnitudes of the stimulus and the accommodative resting state, this blur circle diameter being independent of the pupil diameter. Further consideration of diffractive effects suggests that contrast changes in the intermediate spatial frequency components (approximately 5 c/deg) of the retinal image may play a dominant role in guiding the response.

[1]  I L Bailey,et al.  New Design Principles for Visual Acuity Letter Charts* , 1976, American journal of optometry and physiological optics.

[2]  Lo J. Bour,et al.  The influence of the spatial distribution of a target on the dynamic response and fluctuations of the accommodation of the human eye , 1981, Vision Research.

[3]  S M Ebenholtz,et al.  Accommodative hysteresis: a precursor for induced myopia? , 1983, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[4]  G. Westheimer,et al.  Fluctuations of accommodation under steady viewing conditions , 1959, The Journal of physiology.

[5]  Whiteside Tc.  Accommodation of the human eye in a bright and empty visual field. , 1952, The Journal of physiology.

[6]  G WESTHEIMER,et al.  Significance of fluctuations of accommodation. , 1958, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[7]  G. Heath,et al.  The influence of visual acuity on accommodative responses of the eye. , 1956, American journal of optometry and archives of American Academy of Optometry.

[8]  H. D. Crane.  A theoretical analysis of the visual accommodation system in humans. NASA CR-606. , 1966, NASA contractor report. NASA CR. United States. National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

[9]  W N Charman,et al.  Objective technique for the determination of monochromatic aberrations of the human eye. , 1984, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[10]  H W Leibowitz,et al.  Anomalous myopias and the intermediate dark focus of accommodation. , 1975, Science.

[11]  Charman Wn.  Some sources of discrepancy between static retinoscopy and subjective refraction. , 1975 .

[12]  George K. Hung,et al.  A Quantitative Theory of Control Sharing Between Accommodative and Vergence Controllers , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[13]  G. Breinin,et al.  The effect of pupil size on accommodation, convergence, and the AC/A ratio. , 1962, Investigative ophthalmology.

[14]  G. Wyszecki,et al.  Axial chromatic aberration of the human eye. , 1957, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[15]  J. Semmlow,et al.  Model of Static Accommodative Behavior in Human Amblyopia , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[16]  P. Denieul,et al.  Effects of stimulus vergence on mean accommodation response, microfluctuations of accommodation and optical quality of the human eye , 1982, Vision Research.

[17]  Takeo Iida,et al.  The effect of pupil size on accommodation , 1976, Vision Research.

[18]  W N Charman,et al.  THE DEPTH‐OF‐FOCUS OF THE HUMAN EYE FOR SNELLEN LETTERS* , 1975, American journal of optometry and physiological optics.

[19]  W N Charman,et al.  Accommodation as a Function of Object Form , 1978, American journal of optometry and physiological optics.

[20]  C. Johnson,et al.  Effects of luminance and stimulus distance on accommodation and visual resolution. , 1976, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[21]  F. Toates,et al.  Accommodation function of the human eye. , 1972, Physiological reviews.

[22]  S. Duke-Elder,et al.  Ophthalmic optics and refraction , 1970 .

[23]  I C Wood,et al.  THE ACCOMMODATIVE RESPONSE IN AMBLYOPIA* , 1975, American journal of optometry and physiological optics.

[24]  W. N. Charman,et al.  Dependence of accommodation response on the spatial frequency spectrum of the observed object , 1977, Vision Research.

[25]  Geometrical-optical Treatment of Frequency Response , 1957 .

[26]  M S Banks,et al.  The development of visual accommodation during early infancy. , 1980, Child development.

[27]  D. A. Owens.  A comparison of accommodative responsiveness and contrast sensitivity for sinusoidal gratings , 1980, Vision Research.

[28]  G Smith,et al.  OCULAR DEFOCUS, SPURIOUS RESOLUTION AND CONTRAST REVERSAL * , 1982, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[29]  Smirnov Ms.  Measurement of the wave aberration of the human eye , 1961 .

[30]  Meredith W. Morgan,et al.  ACCOMMODATION AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO CONVERGENCE , 1944 .

[31]  H. Knoll,et al.  The effect of luminance, target configuration and lenses upon the refractive state of the eye. I. , 1956, American journal of optometry and archives of American Academy of Optometry.

[32]  H W Leibowitz,et al.  Night myopia and the intermediate dark focus of accommodation. , 1975, Journal of the Optical Society of America.