December 2002
Volume 43, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   December 2002
Psychophysical Mapping of the Blind Spot: A Validation Study
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • SA Kabanarou
    Institute of Ophthalmology London United Kingdom
  • C Bellmann
    Institute of Ophthalmology London United Kingdom
  • MD Crossland
    Institute of Ophthalmology London United Kingdom
  • LE Culham
    Moorfields Eye Hospital London United Kingdom
  • EM Fine
    Schepens Eye Research Institute Harvard Medical School Boston MA
  • GS Rubin
    Institute of Ophthalmology London United Kingdom
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   S.A. Kabanarou, None; C. Bellmann, None; M.D. Crossland, None; L.E. Culham, None; E.M. Fine, None; G.S. Rubin, None. Grant Identification: Macular Disease Society, Colin Kunkler Fellowship The Burroughs Wellcome Fund
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science December 2002, Vol.43, 3806. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      SA Kabanarou, C Bellmann, MD Crossland, LE Culham, EM Fine, GS Rubin; Psychophysical Mapping of the Blind Spot: A Validation Study . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2002;43(13):3806.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Abstract: : Purpose: Precise mapping of the visual field in persons with age-related macular degeneration (AMD) has required a scanning laser ophthalmoscope (SLO) or other device to control for eye movements. SLOs are not readily available, nor practical for routine clinical use. It is possible to use the physiological blindspot as an eye position marker, and thus assure accurate fixation. To do this, one must develop a technique for mapping the blindspot. Here we compare different techniques for mapping the blindspot with monocular and binocular viewing. Methods: 10 individuals aged 20-35 years with normal vision and no known ocular pathology were tested with three different experimental techniques to map their blind spots with respect to fixation. Monocular mapping was performed with and without control of fixation using an SMI EyeLink eye tracker. The blind spot was also mapped during binocular viewing using CrystalEyes shutter glasses. Horizontal and vertical distances from centre of fixation were compared. Results: The average horizontal distances from fixation to the centre of the blind spot were 16.6 ± 0.9 deg and 15.9 ± 1.52 deg for monocular tests with and without control of fixation, respectively, and 16.1 ± 1.7 deg for the binocular test. The differences were not statistically significant by repeated-measures ANOVA. The average vertical distances were 1.54 ± 0.8 deg, 1.81 ± 0.7 deg, and 1.98 ± 0.7 deg inferior to fixation (difference significant, p< .05). Posthoc comparisons revealed that the vertical distance was displaced inferiorly 28 minarc with binocular viewing compared to monocular viewing with controlled fixation (p < .05). Conclusion: There was close correspondence among the different mapping techniques. Although the determined centre of the blind spot was vertically displaced during binocular viewing, the discrepancy was less than 0.5 degrees of visual angle. These techniques can now be used to compare the size and location of the physiological blind spot mapped using psychophysical measures and actual blind spot imaged with an SLO.

Keywords: 432 imaging methods (CT, FA, ICG, MRI, OCT, RTA, SLO, ultrasound) • 554 retina • 459 low vision 

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.