PurposeTo investigate the influence of induced aniseikonia on stereopsis measured by contour-based and random-dot-based stereograms using a new method.MethodsUnlike previous studies in which aniseikonia was induced using magnifiers, which potentially influenced the position of the test symbols in the half-view, here the image was magnified while maintaining each test symbol’s central position within the half-view. A phoropter and two 4K smartphones were used to measure stereopsis in seventeen young adults aged 20–28 years old. Stereopsis was tested using both contour-based and random-dot-based stereograms under overall or meridional aniseikonia with magnifications ranging from 2.5 to 30%. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to evaluate the effect of aniseikonia on stereopsis.ResultsStereopsis decreased with an increase in aniseikonia magnification in the overall, horizontal, and vertical directions. Stereopsis values (log arcsec) increased from 1.29 ± 0.14 at baseline to 2.38 ± 0.16 with 30% overall aniseikonia of contour-based stereograms. In random-dot based stereograms, stereopsis values increased from 1.29 ± 0.16 at baseline to 2.24 ± 0.23 with 22.5% overall aniseikonia. Overall aniseikonia caused a significantly greater impairment on stereopsis as compared with the changes in meridional directions. In contour-based stereograms, vertical aniseikonia had significantly less impact on stereopsis than horizontal aniseikonia of identical magnification. The opposite phenomenon was found in random-dot-based stereograms.ConclusionStereopsis decreased with an increase of magnification of induced aniseikonia. Magnifying patterns (overall, horizontal, or vertical) also significantly affected stereopsis. The conflicting impact of meridional aniseikonia on stereopsis measured by contour-based and random-dot-based stereograms may be associated with the uniqueness of the two test systems.
Owing to the limitations of printed stereoacuity tests, the effects of luminance and contrast on stereopsis have not yet been sufficiently investigated, despite its important implications in designing stereoacuity measuring instruments, particularly for electronic devices. A stereopsis measurement system was established using two 4 K smartphones and a phoropter to evaluate the effects of luminance and contrast variations on the stereoacuity test. Seventeen young subjects with normal visual acuity and stereopsis were recruited. Two types of test symbols, contour-based and random-dot-based, were used in the experiment. Four series tests were established with different maximum brightness values, including 240 lux, 120 lux, 60 lux, and 30 lux. Each series test contained 19 pages with different contrasts between 95% and 5% and was calculated using the Michelson contrast formula. No significant difference was found for both contour-based and random-dot-based stereograms in any of the contrast groups with different maximum brightness. Similarly, no significant difference was found between contour-based and random-dot-based patterns under different contrasts of above 35%. As the contrast decreased below 30%, the stereopsis was significantly better in the contour-based pattern than in the random-dot-based pattern for some degrees of contrast. The luminance and contrast of the digital display are not critical factors for stereoacuity under normal circumstances. This implies that a standard monitor with a certain 3D technology can be used to measure the stereoacuity threshold without calibrating the luminance and contrast.
Background: The impact of aniseikonia on stereopsis has been studied for decades, however, inconsistency which may be partly attributed to the method of inducing aniseikonia exists among these findings. This study aimed to induce overall and meridional aniseikonia using a three-dimensional (3D) computer and then evaluate the effect of induced aniseikonia on distance stereopsis using contour-based and random-dot-based patterns.Methods: A 3D laptop was used to produce all of the test symbols. Unlike the usual method of creating aniseikonia with size lenses, which would change not only the size but also the relative position of the test symbols in the two images as seen by the two eyes, a new test system was designed to evaluate the aniseikonia, which only modified the size while maintaining the relative position of the test symbols. This new method reduced the disparities induced by location changing of the paired test targets when inducing aniseikonia. Aniseikonia was induced overall or in one of the meridians. The induced meridional aniseikonia included 180°, 30°, 45°, 60°, and 90°, respectively. The range of induced aniseikonia was 0-30% with an increment of 5%.Results: Overall magnification affected stereopsis more than magnification in any one of the meridians.The stereoacuity differences between oblique meridians (30°, 45°, and 60°) were not significant until the aniseikonia increased up to 20%. The difference between 180°, 45°, and 90° was significant when the aniseikonia increased up to 10% in the contour-based test and over 20% in the random-dot-based test. The stereoacuity trend was improved gradually, coupled with the angle changing from 180º to 90º in the contourbased pattern, and deteriorated gradually in the random-dot-based pattern.Conclusions: Overall aniseikonia affected stereopsis more than meridional aniseikonia. The stereoacuity of the contour-based pattern was superior to that of the random-dot-based pattern in the 90° meridian, while the opposite result was obtained in the 180° meridian.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.