Key Words: negative relative accommodation, positive relative accommodation, general binocular dysfunctions C linical evaluation of accommodative and vergence system is an essential part of the study of visual function. The diagnosis of general binocular disorders is performed by means of analysis of accommodative and binocular tests. Some of these tests can be cataloged specifically as accommodative or binocular, basically being assessed in open-loop conditions for the vergence system. This is the case for the cover test, monocular accommodative amplitude, or monocular accommodative facility. However, the remaining tests offer results that are notably influenced by the interactions between accommodation and vergence. As an example, we have the monocular estimate method of dynamic retinoscopy (MEM method), fusional vergences, or relative accommodation.Special attention is given to fusional vergences and relative accommodations. They evaluate the amount of vergence and accommodation that varies while the stimulus that generates the response in the other system remains constant. Any alteration in the accommodative or vergence system could influence the other system and result in abnormal values of these tests.Traditionally, fusional vergence results have been considered more important than the findings of relative accommodation. Thus, Saladin 1 suggests that if the accommodative amplitude, the values of accommodative facility, and those of fusional vergences at far and near distance are known, relative accommodations do not offer new information. Due to the interactions between accommodation and vergence, the values of fusional vergences and relative accommodations are so related that one would think that it is not necessary to study them together in a visual analysis. In fact, some authors 2-6 do not use relative accommodations for diagnosing general binocular disorders, more because of a question of duplicity than for not being a valid test. However, other authors use relative accommodations as a reference in the diagnosis of accommodative and vergence dysfunctions 7-11 or as tests associated with the visual function. 12 In most of the previous cases, positive relative accommodation (PRA) and negative relative accommodation (NRA) are used as complementary diagnostic tests of some disorders. Hokoda 7 used a low PRA (Յ1.25 D) as one of two supplementary signs that needed to be present in accommodative insufficiency. Scheiman et al. 8 also used PRA for diagnosing accommodative dysfunction and considered that a low value of NRA (Ͻ1.50 D) was related to convergence insufficiency.Porcar and Martínez-Palomera 9 considered a low NRA (Յ1.50 D) and PRA (Յ1.25 D) associated with accommodative infacility, and they also used this low value of PRA for diagnosing accommodative insufficiency. Finally, García et al. 10 and Lara et al. 11 used 1040-5488/02/7912-0779/0 VOL. 79, NO. 12, PP. 779-787