This content is PDF only. Please click on the PDF icon to access.
Abstract
The New Aniseikonia Test (NAT), a hand-held direct-comparison test using red/green anaglyphs, has several potential advantages as a screener. We compared the validity of the NAT to that of the Space Eikonometer in three experiments: (1) aniseikonia was induced by calibrated size lenses in a double-blind study of 15 normal subjects; (2) habitual aniseikonia was measured with both instruments in four patients; and (3) eight of the normal subjects were retested with a computer-video simulation of the NAT. The NAT underestimated induced aniseikonia by a factor of 3 in the normal subjects and underestimated habitual aniseikonia in four patients. The Space Eikonometer correctly measured the magnitude of induced aniseikonia in the normal subjects. The simulation test did not show underestimation in the eight normal subjects. We could not attribute the NAT's underestimation of aniseikonia to the red/green anaglyph method, printing error, psychophysical method, or the direct-comparison test format. We speculate that the NAT induces a different sensory fusion response to aniseikonia than do the other tests, and that this altered sensory fusion response diminishes measured aniseikonia. We conclude that the NAT is not a valid measure of aniseikonia.