May 2006
Volume 47, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2006
Defocus and Contrast Sensitivity
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • I.L. Bailey
    School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley, CA
  • S.N. Fitz
    School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley, CA
  • J.T. Mao
    School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley, CA
  • S.M. Hamamoto
    School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley, CA
  • K.T. Aoyagi
    School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley, CA
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  I.L. Bailey, None; S.N. Fitz, None; J.T. Mao, None; S.M. Hamamoto, None; K.T. Aoyagi, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2006, Vol.47, 5833. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      I.L. Bailey, S.N. Fitz, J.T. Mao, S.M. Hamamoto, K.T. Aoyagi; Defocus and Contrast Sensitivity . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2006;47(13):5833.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Purpose: : Newly developed tests of contrast sensitivity present a sequential–number search task and a blinking square detection task on a computer screen. These tests determine contrast sensitivity thresholds and plot the relationship between response time and target contrast. We examined how thresholds and response times are affected by defocus

Methods: : Contrast sensitivity was measured for 6 normally–sighted young–adult subjects as they performed the search and detection tasks using large (40mm) targets viewed from 50 cm (4.5 degree). Subjects were tested monocularly wearing supplementary lenses of powers, plano, +3 D, +5D, and +7D in randomly assigned sequences before their dominant eye

Results: : For the detection of blinking squares, the average contrast sensitivity was scarcely reduced (0.04 log units) by the +3D and + 5D lenses and there was a only a small reduction (0.18 log units) with +7D. For the search task, contrast sensitivity reduced progressively by 0.07, 0.16 and 0.30 log units with the +3, +5, and +7D lenses. For both CS tests, defocus had no effect on the patterns by which response times slowed as threshold contrasts were approached. These results are significantly different from those of Jansonius and Kooijman who reported profound reductions in contrast sensitivity with defocus with an almost linear reduction of contrast sensitivity for edge detection CS reduced by 0.69 log units for only 2D of defocus.

Conclusions: : For large targets, the blinking–square detection test is relatively insensitive to substantial defocus. The contrast thresholds for the number search test are systematically reduced by spherical defocus, but only by a modest amount. These new computer based tests were designed for clinical use and they are robust in that they are relative insensitive to optical blur. These results suggest it is not critical to accurately correct the patient’s refraction when performing these tests.

Keywords: contrast sensitivity • low vision • visual search 

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.