June 2015
Volume 56, Issue 7
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2015
Myopes’ ability to accurately accommodate to blur cues in virtual 3D images
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Kristen Kerber
    The New England College of Optometry, Boston, MA
  • Guido Maiello
    Psychology, Northeastern University, Boston, MA
    UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
  • Frank Thorn
    The New England College of Optometry, Boston, MA
  • Peter J. Bex
    Psychology, Northeastern University, Boston, MA
  • Fuensanta A. Vera-Diaz
    The New England College of Optometry, Boston, MA
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Kristen Kerber, None; Guido Maiello, None; Frank Thorn, None; Peter Bex, None; Fuensanta Vera-Diaz, None
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2015, Vol.56, 538. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Kristen Kerber, Guido Maiello, Frank Thorn, Peter J. Bex, Fuensanta A. Vera-Diaz; Myopes’ ability to accurately accommodate to blur cues in virtual 3D images. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2015;56(7 ):538.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Purpose: Defocus blur affects refractive error development. Various human studies report decreased ability to accurately accommodate in myopic adults and children compared to emmetropes, however other studies have found no differences. We hypothesize that myopes have a decreased ability to accurately accommodate, but only when certain 3D cues to accommodation are not available to them.

Methods: Binocular accommodative responses were measured using a PowerRefractor while subjects wore shutter glasses and viewed naturalistic images on a 3D display. Stimuli were “dead leaves” images that capture the spatial characteristics of real world images.<br /> <br /> Subjects viewed five types of images, each randomly presented five times at 40cm for 5 sec, with various cues to accommodation: (1) flat [2D], (2) blur gradient, (3) disparity gradient, (4) size gradient, (5) all cues. Subjects were instructed to fixate on a central green dot at all times.<br /> <br /> Thirty-eight young (22 to 31 years) healthy adults participated; reliable data was obtained for 21 (n=10 myopes). Refractive error was determined by binocular subjective refraction that followed a vision screening and objective refraction.

Results: Myopes show less stable accommodation responses than emmetropes, which are significantly more variable when viewing 2D flat images (Wilcoxon, p=0.01), but become as stable as emmetropes’ responses when 3D and blur cues are available.<br /> <br /> Accommodation response latencies appear larger in myopes for all conditions, particularly for the “size” and “disparity” conditions. A positive correlation was found between amount of myopia and accommodation response latency when size and/or disparity cues were available (R2>0.4).<br /> <br /> The amplitude of accommodation was not significantly different between the refractive groups for any condition, although myopes appear to accommodate more (smaller lags) for all conditions.

Conclusions: Our results indicate larger variability in accommodation responses in myopes when viewing flat images. Only when additional cues are added (disparity, blur, size), do myopes’ accommodation responses stabilize. In addition, the time lag to achieve adequate accommodation is larger for myopes. Inaccuracies of accommodation when viewing 2D images (typical of indoor activities) may cause long-term blur on the retina, which may impede precise emmetropization.


This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.