Pupil responses to near visual demand during human visual development

Wang, Jingyun; Candy, T. Rowan

doi:10.1167/11.4.6

Cited by 19 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Pupil size is known to be modulated by cognitive factors, such as cognitive effort or ''amount of attention'' and decision making (Hess & Polt, 1960;Kahneman & Beatty, 1966;Einhauser et al, 2008;Nassar et al, 2012;Wierda et al, 2012), by changes in the focal distance (Marg & Morgan, 1949;Phillips, Winn, & Gilmartin, 1992;Bharadwaj, Wang, & Candy, 2011), as well as by the luminance of attended surfaces (Binda et al, 2013). Specifically, pupillary dilation is associated with increased cognitive effort.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pupil constrictions to photographs of the sun

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pupil constricts in response to light increments and dilates with light decrements. Here we show that a picture of the sun, introducing a small overall decrease in light level across the field of view, results in a pupillary constriction. Thus, the pictorial representation of a high-luminance object (the sun) can override the normal pupillary dilation elicited by a light decrement. In a series of experiments that control for a variety of factors known to modulate pupil size, we show that the effect (a) does not depend on the retinal position of the images and (b) is modulated by attention. It has long been known that cognitive factors can affect pupil diameter by producing pupillary dilations. Our results indicate that high-level visual analysis (beyond the simple subcortical system mediating the pupillary response to light) can also induce pupillary constriction, with an effect size of about 0.1 mm.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pupil constrictions to photographs of the sun

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The slope of this light distribution can be calibrated to indicate the sign (myopic or hyperopic) and magnitude of the eye’s defocus over a limited but useful operating range. This approach can be applied to both eyes concurrently at video frame rates, while pupil size and eye position are recorded simultaneously using first Purkinje image tracking [4,7,12]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Empirical variability in the calibration of slope-based eccentric photorefraction

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Refraction estimates from eccentric infrared (IR) photorefraction depend critically on the calibration of luminance slopes in the pupil. While the intersubject variability of this calibration has been estimated, there is no systematic evaluation of its intrasubject variability. This study determined the within subject inter- and intra-session repeatability of this calibration factor and the optimum range of lenses needed to derive this value. Relative calibrations for the MCS PowerRefractor and a customized photorefractor were estimated twice within one session or across two sessions by placing trial lenses before one eye covered with an IR transmitting filter. The data were subsequently resampled with various lens combinations to determine the impact of lens power range on the calibration estimates. Mean (±1.96 SD) calibration slopes were 0.99 ± 0.39 for North Americans with the MCS PowerRefractor (relative to its built-in value) and 0.65 ± 0.25 Ls/D and 0.40 ± 0.09 Ls/D for Indians and North Americans with the custom photorefractor, respectively. The ±95% limits of agreement of intrasubject variability ranged from ±0.39 to ±0.56 for the MCS PowerRefractor and ±0.03 Ls/D to ±0.04 Ls/D for the custom photorefractor. The mean differences within and across sessions were not significantly different from zero (p > 0.38 for all). The combined intersubject and intrasubject variability of calibration is therefore about ±40% of the mean value, implying that significant errors in individual refraction/accommodation estimates may arise if a group-average calibration is used. Protocols containing both plus and minus lenses had calibration slopes closest to the gold-standard protocol, suggesting that they may provide the best estimate of the calibration factor compared to those containing either plus or minus lenses.

show abstract

“…The mean change in pupil diameter when accommodating was significantly smaller in infants and children than in adults and also significantly smaller with monocular than with binocular viewing. 6 Accommodative miosis affects the subjective accommodation response by altering the depth of field, 9 and it can also affect the objective response by changing the higher-order aberrations. 4,10,11 Accommodation produces changes in ocular spherical aberration (SA) 12,13 owing to the conicity of the lens, 11,14 which may also be produced by a subtle action of the ciliary muscle on the front surface of the iris.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%