May 2005
Volume 46, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2005
"Bothersome" Blur: A New Functional Unit of Blur Perception
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • K.J. Ciuffreda
    Vision Sciences, SUNY College of Optometry, New York, NY
  • A. Selenow
    Manhattan Vision Associates, New York, NY
  • B. Wang
    Vision Sciences, SUNY College of Optometry, New York, NY
  • G. Zikos
    Manhattan Vision Associates, New York, NY
  • S.R. Ali
    Manhattan Vision Associates, New York, NY
  • B. Vasudevan
    Vision Sciences, SUNY College of Optometry, New York, NY
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  K.J. Ciuffreda, None; A. Selenow, None; B. Wang, None; G. Zikos, None; S.R. Ali, None; B. Vasudevan, None.
  • Footnotes
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2005, Vol.46, 2930. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      K.J. Ciuffreda, A. Selenow, B. Wang, G. Zikos, S.R. Ali, B. Vasudevan; "Bothersome" Blur: A New Functional Unit of Blur Perception . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2005;46(13):2930.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Abstract: : Purpose: Conventional measures of blur perception (e.g., depth–of–focus) are pure neurosensory threshold phenomena. However, the amount of blur perceived subjectively as being "bothersome", namely undesirable with respect to presumed task performance such as resolving fine target details and reading, remains unknown. Methods: A Badal optical system was used to measure blur detection (from far point target clarity to first slight blur), bothersome blur (increased blur that might adversely affect some task), and non–resolvable blur (further increased blur that would make the target non–identifiable) dioptric thresholds monocularly either to an isolated 20/50 or 20/200 Snellen E, or to 20/50 lines of text (8 deg), tested in consecutive order. The ascending method of limits was used. Blur values were referenced to the far point. Subjects were comprised of 13 visually–normal young adults. Cycloplegia was used to paralyze accommodation. A subset of subjects was also assessed over the course of a month, day, and hour to determine short– and long–term repeatability. Results: Within each target type, the mean bothersome blur threshold was always significantly larger than for blur detection and significantly smaller than for non–resolvable blur. Across target types and blur criteria, the bothersome blur thresholds for the isolated 20/50 E (1.02D) and the 20/50 text (1.34D) were not significantly different (p<0.10), although in 12 of the 13 subjects the latter were larger. However, both were significantly smaller than for the isolated 20/200 E (1.80D). These findings were repeatable over the three time courses tested. Conclusions: We have developed a new unit of functional blur termed "bothersome blur". It is primarily influenced by target detail, and secondarily by target extent. The trend for most values of bothersome blur to be larger for the 20/50 text rather than the single 20/50 letter suggests partial cone pooling of the blur information. These findings have important clinical implications with respect to tolerances for optical lens design and refractive surgery outcomes, as well as provide insight into basic aspects of human blur perception.

Keywords: ocular motor control • adaptation: blur 

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.