To determine the relationships between individual differences in observers with low vision, we correlated the results described above with each other and logMAR acuity (
Table 2). To reduce the number of comparisons, results from two peripheral locations were averaged for single-target motion discrimination (12.5° and 25°, correlated at
rs = 0.91), motion comparison (12.5° and 25°, correlated at
rs = 0.95), and visual crowding conditions (8° and 16°, correlated at
rs = 0.78). These results and those from other experiments were correlated with each other and with logMAR acuity for all observers with low vision. All correlations were positive, such that better performance on one task predicted better performance on other tasks. Without correction for multiple comparisons, 18 of 21 correlations were significant at an α value of 0.05 (
Table 2). However, correlation magnitudes were not high, explaining, on average, only 29% of variance. The strongest relationships were, unsurprisingly, between motion discrimination and motion comparison tasks (mean
rs = 0.85). On average, visual search and crowding correlated with other experimental tasks at 0.58 and 0.44, respectively. Similar correlations were observed for foveal motion acuity (mean
rs = 0.55). Overall, logMAR acuity correlated reasonably well with most other measures (all but one
rs > 0.42). The exception was a lack of correlation with visual crowding (
rs = 0.01). As elaborated in Discussion below, it is evident that standard foveal acuity measurements are a reliable but moderate predictor of motion perception and peripheral visual ability.