The accommodation of two groups of six observers each of whom viewed high-contrast checkerboard targets presented at six distances (0.9, 1.8, 3.7, 7.3, 16.6 and 29.3m) against either of two backgrounds (highly textured or textureless) was measured with a laser optometer. Significant differences existed between the accommodative responses at each distance due to backgrounds. Implications for size-distances perception and target detection are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BenelR. A.Eyes and glass curtains: Visual accommodation, the Mandalbaum effect and Apparent size. Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors Society, Los Angeles, CA., October 13-17, 1980.
2.
BenelR. A.Visual Accommodation, The Mandelbaum effect, and apparent size. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of ILlinois at Urban-Champaign, Champaign, IL, 1979.
3.
GretherW. F., and BakerC. A.Visual presentation of information. In vanCottH. P., and KincadeR. G. (Eds.) Human engineering guide to equipment design.Washington, DC: Superintendent of Documents, 1972.
4.
HennessyR. T.Instrument myopia. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 1965, 65, 1114–1120.
5.
HennessyR. T.Instrument myopia. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 1965, 65, 1114–1120.
6.
HennessyR. T., and LeibowitzH. W.The effect of peripheral stimulus on accommodation. Perception and Psychophysics, 1971, 10, 129–132.
7.
IavecchiaJ. H., IavecchiaH. P., and RoscoeS. N.The moon illusion: Apparent size and visual accommodation distance.Champaign, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of Psychology, Technical Report Eng Psy-78-4/AFOSR-78-5, 1978.
8.
JohnsonC.A.Effects of luminace and stimulus distance on accommodation and visual resolution. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 1976, 66, 138–142.
9.
LeibowitzH. W., and HennessyR. T.The laser optometer and some implications for behavioral research. American Psychologist, 1975, 30, 349–352.
10.
LeitnerE.F., and HainesR.F.Human Factors research on head-up displays: 3. The magnitude of visual accommodation to a head-up display Preprints of the Aerospace Medical Association Meeting, San Antonio, TX, May 4-7, 1981
11.
MathewsM. L., AngusR. G., and PearceD. G.Effectivenss of accommodative aids in reducing empty field myopia in visual search. Human Factors, 1978, 20, 733–740.
12.
OwensD. A.The Mandelbaum effect: Evidence of an accommodative bias toward intermediate viewing distance. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 1979, 69, 646–651.
13.
PostR. P., OwensR. L.OwensD. A., and LeibowitzH. W.Correction of empty field myopia on the basis of the dark focus of accommodation. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 1979, 69, 89–92.
14.
WhitesideT.C. D., and GronowD. G. C. vision in the empty visual field. The effect of empty myopia upon the minimum visual angle, Farnborough, England: RAF Institute of Aviation Medicine, Technical Report FPRC 872, March 1954.
