Abstract

The phenomenon of night myopia, the tendency to overaccommodate for distant objects as luminance is decreased, results from the passive return of accommodation to an individually determined intermediate resting or dark focus. More generally, accommodation is viewed as a compromise between the subject's individual resting focus and the accommodative stimulus. Under optimum viewing conditions, accommodation tends to correspond to the distance of the stimulus, but is biased progressively toward the dark focus as the adequady of the accommodative stimulus is degraded by decreased luminance. Control experiments suggest that optical aberrations are not major factors that contribute to this effect.

PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |

  1. J. R. Levine, R. Soc. Lond., Notes and Reports 20, 100 (1965).
  2. M. Koomen, R. Scolnik, and R. Tousey. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 41, 80 (1951).
  3. H. A. Knoll, Am. J. Optom. 29, 69 (1952).
  4. H. A. W. Schober, Optik 11, 282 (1954).
  5. J. Mellerio, Vision Res. 6, 217 (1966).
  6. I. M. Borish, Clinical Refraction (Professional Press, New York, 1970).
  7. H. Schober, Das Sehen, Vol. II, 68 (VEB Fachbuchverlag, Leipzig, 1964), has pointed out that the defocused image that results from night myopia may serve to increase light sensitivity under low-luminance conditions, in a manner analogous to the tapetum lucidem of lower forms.
  8. F. M. Toates, Physiol. Rev. 52, 828 (1972).
  9. G. Wald and D. R. Griffin, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 37, 321 (1947).
  10. J. M. Otero, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 41, 942 (1951).
  11. M. Luckiesh and F. K. Moss, J. Expt. Psychol. 26, 352 (1940).
  12. F. W. Campbell and J. A. F. Primrose. Trans. Opt Soc. 73, 353 (1953).
  13. M. Alpern and H. David, Ind. Med. Sur. 27, 551 (1958).
  14. E. F. Fincham, Vision Res. 1, 425 (1962).
  15. G. Westheimer, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 47, 714 (1957).
  16. G. Westheimer and S. M. Blair, Vision Res. 13, 1035 (1973).
  17. M. W. Morgan, Am. J. Optom. 23, 99 (1946); 34, 347 (1957); Brit. J. Physiol. Opt. 15, 154 (1958).
  18. R. T. Hennessy and H. W. Leibowitz, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 60, 1700 (1970); Beh. Res. Meth. Inst. 4, 237 (1972); H. W. Leibowitz and R. T. Hennessy, Am. Psychologist 30, 349 (1975).
  19. A recent article by W. N. Charman, Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 51, 832 (1974), indicates that the plane of no apparent motion, or stationarity, for the laser optometers used in the present experiments actually falls at varying positions between the axis and surface of the drum. Thus, our assuming the axis as the reference point results in a small error of underestimation of the accommodative response, which increases with increased accommodation.
  20. H. A. Knoll, Am. J. Optom. 43, 415 (1966).
  21. W. R. Baldwin and W. B. Stover, Am. J. Optom. 45, 143 (1968).
  22. F. Ingelstam and S. I. Ragnarsson, Vision Res. 12, 411 (1972).
  23. Institute for Perception TNO, Soesterberg, Netherlands.
  24. Since all subjects demonstrated at least 20/20 near and far acuity, large refractive errors are considered unlikely. Any small remaining refractive errors would not have affected either the correlation values nor the nature of the present results.
  25. The authors are indebted to Dr. Lewis O. Harvey, Jr. and to John T. Fisher, M.D. and Channing Nicholas, M. D. for their advice and assistance.
  26. The combined effect of spherical and chromatic aberrations has been estimated to be only 0.5–0.75 D, which is considerably less than the magnitude of night myopia shown by the majority of the subjects in the present study. Spherical aberration, as well as other effects associated with large pupils, should be exaggerated by pupil dilation; this was not found in Experiment III. The possible contribution of these factors, in addition to those of chromatic aberration and the Purkinje shift, seem to be minimized by the fact that all luminance levels in the present study were photopic.
  27. J. Palacios, Investigacion y Progresso 14, 267 (1943).
  28. C. A. Johnson, Ph.D. dissertation (Pennsylvania State University, 1974) University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Mich. (1974).
  29. R. T. Hennessy, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 65, 1114 (1975).
  30. H. W. Leibowitz, R. T. Hennessy, and D. A. Owens, Psychologia 18, Sept. (1975).
  31. H. W. Leibowitz and D. A. Owens, Science 189, 646 (1975).

Alpern, M.

M. Alpern and H. David, Ind. Med. Sur. 27, 551 (1958).

Baldwin, W. R.

W. R. Baldwin and W. B. Stover, Am. J. Optom. 45, 143 (1968).

Blair, S. M.

G. Westheimer and S. M. Blair, Vision Res. 13, 1035 (1973).

Borish, I. M.

I. M. Borish, Clinical Refraction (Professional Press, New York, 1970).

Campbell, F. W.

F. W. Campbell and J. A. F. Primrose. Trans. Opt Soc. 73, 353 (1953).

Charman, W. N.

A recent article by W. N. Charman, Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 51, 832 (1974), indicates that the plane of no apparent motion, or stationarity, for the laser optometers used in the present experiments actually falls at varying positions between the axis and surface of the drum. Thus, our assuming the axis as the reference point results in a small error of underestimation of the accommodative response, which increases with increased accommodation.

David, H.

M. Alpern and H. David, Ind. Med. Sur. 27, 551 (1958).

Fincham, E. F.

E. F. Fincham, Vision Res. 1, 425 (1962).

Griffin, D. R.

G. Wald and D. R. Griffin, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 37, 321 (1947).

Hennessy, R. T.

R. T. Hennessy and H. W. Leibowitz, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 60, 1700 (1970); Beh. Res. Meth. Inst. 4, 237 (1972); H. W. Leibowitz and R. T. Hennessy, Am. Psychologist 30, 349 (1975).

R. T. Hennessy, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 65, 1114 (1975).

H. W. Leibowitz, R. T. Hennessy, and D. A. Owens, Psychologia 18, Sept. (1975).

Ingelstam, F.

F. Ingelstam and S. I. Ragnarsson, Vision Res. 12, 411 (1972).

Johnson, C. A.

C. A. Johnson, Ph.D. dissertation (Pennsylvania State University, 1974) University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Mich. (1974).

Knoll, H. A.

H. A. Knoll, Am. J. Optom. 43, 415 (1966).

H. A. Knoll, Am. J. Optom. 29, 69 (1952).

Koomen, M.

M. Koomen, R. Scolnik, and R. Tousey. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 41, 80 (1951).

Leibowitz, H. W.

R. T. Hennessy and H. W. Leibowitz, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 60, 1700 (1970); Beh. Res. Meth. Inst. 4, 237 (1972); H. W. Leibowitz and R. T. Hennessy, Am. Psychologist 30, 349 (1975).

H. W. Leibowitz, R. T. Hennessy, and D. A. Owens, Psychologia 18, Sept. (1975).

H. W. Leibowitz and D. A. Owens, Science 189, 646 (1975).

Levine, J. R.

J. R. Levine, R. Soc. Lond., Notes and Reports 20, 100 (1965).

Luckiesh, M.

M. Luckiesh and F. K. Moss, J. Expt. Psychol. 26, 352 (1940).

Mellerio, J.

J. Mellerio, Vision Res. 6, 217 (1966).

Morgan, M. W.

M. W. Morgan, Am. J. Optom. 23, 99 (1946); 34, 347 (1957); Brit. J. Physiol. Opt. 15, 154 (1958).

Moss, F. K.

M. Luckiesh and F. K. Moss, J. Expt. Psychol. 26, 352 (1940).

Otero, J. M.

J. M. Otero, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 41, 942 (1951).

Owens, D. A.

H. W. Leibowitz and D. A. Owens, Science 189, 646 (1975).

H. W. Leibowitz, R. T. Hennessy, and D. A. Owens, Psychologia 18, Sept. (1975).

Palacios, J.

J. Palacios, Investigacion y Progresso 14, 267 (1943).

Primrose, J. A. F.

F. W. Campbell and J. A. F. Primrose. Trans. Opt Soc. 73, 353 (1953).

Ragnarsson, S. I.

F. Ingelstam and S. I. Ragnarsson, Vision Res. 12, 411 (1972).

Schober, H.

H. Schober, Das Sehen, Vol. II, 68 (VEB Fachbuchverlag, Leipzig, 1964), has pointed out that the defocused image that results from night myopia may serve to increase light sensitivity under low-luminance conditions, in a manner analogous to the tapetum lucidem of lower forms.

Schober, H. A. W.

H. A. W. Schober, Optik 11, 282 (1954).

Scolnik, R.

M. Koomen, R. Scolnik, and R. Tousey. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 41, 80 (1951).

Stover, W. B.

W. R. Baldwin and W. B. Stover, Am. J. Optom. 45, 143 (1968).

Toates, F. M.

F. M. Toates, Physiol. Rev. 52, 828 (1972).

Tousey, R.

M. Koomen, R. Scolnik, and R. Tousey. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 41, 80 (1951).

Wald, G.

G. Wald and D. R. Griffin, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 37, 321 (1947).

Westheimer, G.

G. Westheimer, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 47, 714 (1957).

G. Westheimer and S. M. Blair, Vision Res. 13, 1035 (1973).

Other

J. R. Levine, R. Soc. Lond., Notes and Reports 20, 100 (1965).

M. Koomen, R. Scolnik, and R. Tousey. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 41, 80 (1951).

H. A. Knoll, Am. J. Optom. 29, 69 (1952).

H. A. W. Schober, Optik 11, 282 (1954).

J. Mellerio, Vision Res. 6, 217 (1966).

I. M. Borish, Clinical Refraction (Professional Press, New York, 1970).

H. Schober, Das Sehen, Vol. II, 68 (VEB Fachbuchverlag, Leipzig, 1964), has pointed out that the defocused image that results from night myopia may serve to increase light sensitivity under low-luminance conditions, in a manner analogous to the tapetum lucidem of lower forms.

F. M. Toates, Physiol. Rev. 52, 828 (1972).

G. Wald and D. R. Griffin, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 37, 321 (1947).

J. M. Otero, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 41, 942 (1951).

M. Luckiesh and F. K. Moss, J. Expt. Psychol. 26, 352 (1940).

F. W. Campbell and J. A. F. Primrose. Trans. Opt Soc. 73, 353 (1953).

M. Alpern and H. David, Ind. Med. Sur. 27, 551 (1958).

E. F. Fincham, Vision Res. 1, 425 (1962).

G. Westheimer, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 47, 714 (1957).

G. Westheimer and S. M. Blair, Vision Res. 13, 1035 (1973).

M. W. Morgan, Am. J. Optom. 23, 99 (1946); 34, 347 (1957); Brit. J. Physiol. Opt. 15, 154 (1958).

R. T. Hennessy and H. W. Leibowitz, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 60, 1700 (1970); Beh. Res. Meth. Inst. 4, 237 (1972); H. W. Leibowitz and R. T. Hennessy, Am. Psychologist 30, 349 (1975).

A recent article by W. N. Charman, Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 51, 832 (1974), indicates that the plane of no apparent motion, or stationarity, for the laser optometers used in the present experiments actually falls at varying positions between the axis and surface of the drum. Thus, our assuming the axis as the reference point results in a small error of underestimation of the accommodative response, which increases with increased accommodation.

H. A. Knoll, Am. J. Optom. 43, 415 (1966).

W. R. Baldwin and W. B. Stover, Am. J. Optom. 45, 143 (1968).

F. Ingelstam and S. I. Ragnarsson, Vision Res. 12, 411 (1972).

Institute for Perception TNO, Soesterberg, Netherlands.

Since all subjects demonstrated at least 20/20 near and far acuity, large refractive errors are considered unlikely. Any small remaining refractive errors would not have affected either the correlation values nor the nature of the present results.

The authors are indebted to Dr. Lewis O. Harvey, Jr. and to John T. Fisher, M.D. and Channing Nicholas, M. D. for their advice and assistance.

The combined effect of spherical and chromatic aberrations has been estimated to be only 0.5–0.75 D, which is considerably less than the magnitude of night myopia shown by the majority of the subjects in the present study. Spherical aberration, as well as other effects associated with large pupils, should be exaggerated by pupil dilation; this was not found in Experiment III. The possible contribution of these factors, in addition to those of chromatic aberration and the Purkinje shift, seem to be minimized by the fact that all luminance levels in the present study were photopic.

J. Palacios, Investigacion y Progresso 14, 267 (1943).

C. A. Johnson, Ph.D. dissertation (Pennsylvania State University, 1974) University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Mich. (1974).

R. T. Hennessy, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 65, 1114 (1975).

H. W. Leibowitz, R. T. Hennessy, and D. A. Owens, Psychologia 18, Sept. (1975).

H. W. Leibowitz and D. A. Owens, Science 189, 646 (1975).

Cited By

OSA participates in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from OSA journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.