Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
About this PDF file: This new digital representation of the original work has been recomposed from XML files created from the original paper book, not from the original typesetting files. Page breaks are true to the original; line lengths, word breaks, heading styles, and other typesetting-specific formatting, however, cannot be retained, and some typographic errors may have been accidentally inserted. Please use the print version of this publication as the authoritative version for attribution. Washington, D.C. 1985 Committee on Vision National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Emergent Techniques for Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education Assessment of Visual Performance i

OCR for page R1
About this PDF file: This new digital representation of the original work has been recomposed from XML files created from the original paper book, not from the original typesetting files. Page breaks are true to the original; line lengths, word breaks, heading styles, and other typesetting-specific formatting, however, cannot be retained, and some typographic errors may have been accidentally inserted. Please ii NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was established by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and of advising the federal government. The Council operates in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy under the authority of its congressional charter of 1863, which establishes the Academy as a private, nonprofit, self-governing membership corporation. The Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in the conduct of their services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. It is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. The National Academy of Engineering and the Institute of Medicine were established in 1964 and 1970, respectively, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences. This work relates to Department of the Navy contract N00014-80-C-0159 issued by the Office of Naval Research under Contract Authority NR 201-124. However, the content does not necessarily reflect the position or the policy of the government, and no official endorsement should be inferred. The United States government has at least a royalty-free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable license throughout the world for government purposes to publish, translate, reproduce, deliver, perform, dispose of, and to authorize others to do, all or any portion of this work. Available from: Committee on Vision, National Research Council, 2101 Constitution Avenue, Washington, D.C. 20418. use the print version of this publication as the authoritative version for attribution.

OCR for page R1
About this PDF file: This new digital representation of the original work has been recomposed from XML files created from the original paper book, not from the original typesetting files. Page breaks are true to the original; line lengths, word breaks, heading styles, and other typesetting-specific formatting, however, cannot be retained, and some typographic errors may have been accidentally inserted. Please iii WORKING GROUP ON EMERGENT TECHNIQUES FOR ASSESSMENT OF VISUAL PERFORMANCE IVAN BODIS-WOLLNER (Cochair), Department of Neurology, Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York (M.D., neurology) LEWIS O. HARVEY (Cochair), Department of Psychology, University of Colorado (Ph.D., psychology) JAMES P. COMERFORD, New England College of Optometry, Boston (O.D., Ph.D., optometry, psychophysics) ANN B. FULTON, Department of Ophthalmology, Children's Hospital, Boston (M.D., ophthalmology) ARTHUR P. GINSBURG, Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio (Ph.D., psychophysics, engineering) JAMES E. GOODSON, Naval Aerospace Medical Institute, Pensacola, Florida (Ph.D., physiological psychology) FREDERICK KITTERLE, Department of Psychology, University of Toledo (Ph.D., psychology) HERSCHEL W. LEIBOWITZ, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University (Ph.D., psychology) D. ALFRED OWENS, Department of Psychology, Franklin and Marshall College (Ph.D., psychology) RANDOLPH BLAKE, Consultant use the print version of this publication as the authoritative version for attribution.

OCR for page R1
About this PDF file: This new digital representation of the original work has been recomposed from XML files created from the original paper book, not from the original typesetting files. Page breaks are true to the original; line lengths, word breaks, heading styles, and other typesetting-specific formatting, however, cannot be retained, and some typographic errors may have been accidentally inserted. Please iv COMMITTEE ON VISION ROBERT SEKULER (Chair), Departments of Psychology, Ophthalmology, and Neurobiology/Physiology, Northwestern University ANTHONY J. ADAMS, School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley IRVING BIEDERMAN, Board of Studies in Psychology, University of California, Santa Cruz RONALD E. CARR, New York University Medical Center NIGEL DAW, Departments of Physiology and Biophysics, Washington University, St. Louis SHELDON EBENHOLTZ, Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin DONALD A. FOX, College of Optometry, University of Houston LLOYD KAUFMAN, Department of Psychology, New York University JO ANN KINNEY, Surrey, Maine DONALD G. PITTS, College of Optometry, University of Houston WAYNE SHEBILSKE, Study Director LLYN M. ELLISON, Administrative Secretary GORA P. LERMA, Administrative Secretary use the print version of this publication as the authoritative version for attribution.

OCR for page R1
About this PDF file: This new digital representation of the original work has been recomposed from XML files created from the original paper book, not from the original typesetting files. Page breaks are true to the original; line lengths, word breaks, heading styles, and other typesetting-specific formatting, however, cannot be retained, and some typographic errors may have been accidentally inserted. Please PREFACE v PREFACE The Committee on Vision is a standing committee of the National Research Council's Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. The committee provides analysis and advice on scientific issues and applied problems involving vision. It also attempts to stimulate the development of visual science and to provide a forum in which basic and applied scientists, engineers, and clinicians can interact. Working groups of the committee study questions that may involve engineering and equipment, physiological and physical optics, neurophysiology, psychophysics, perception, environmental effects on vision, and treatment of visual disorders. In the past several years, the Committee on Vision has formed a number of working groups and sponsored symposia to consider guidelines for specifying the measurement of vision. The working groups have made recommendations on the testing of color vision, visual fields, and visual acuity; a recent symposium sponsored by the committee concentrated on clinical applications of visual psychophysics (Proenza et al., 1981). In contrast to these studies of accepted practices, this report focuses on emerging techniques that could help determine whether people have the vision necessary to do their jobs. Its purpose is to examine some of these emerging techniques, to point out their usefulness in predicting performance on other visual and visual-motor tasks, and to make recommendations for future research. The members of the working group were chosen for their expertise in vision research, and the report reflects their evaluation of which techniques are important and worthy of wider appreciation and application in the screening of vision and visual performance. They did not consider the appropriateness of these new methods for medical diagnosis or for clinical evaluation. Funds for this study were provided from the general budget of the Committee on Vision, which is sponsored by the U.S. Army, Navy and Air Force, the National Institute on Aging, the National Institute of Handicapped Research, the National Science Foundation, the Office of Special Education, the Veterans Administration, and from the American Academy of Ophthalmology and the American Optometric Association. The committee gratefully acknowledges the efforts of those who worked on the report. Randolph Blake, of Northwestern University, made a major contribution to this study by reviewing all the materials that had been use the print version of this publication as the authoritative version for attribution.

OCR for page R1
About this PDF file: This new digital representation of the original work has been recomposed from XML files created from the original paper book, not from the original typesetting files. Page breaks are true to the original; line lengths, word breaks, heading styles, and other typesetting-specific formatting, however, cannot be retained, and some typographic errors may have been accidentally inserted. Please use the print version of this publication as the authoritative version for attribution. staff. PREFACE Committee on Vision Robert Sekuler, Chair the study. Production of the report was effectively assisted by Llyn Ellison and Gora Lerma of the committee vi prepared and writing a paper that provided a framework for the report. The final report was prepared by Lewis Harvey and Ivan Bodis-Wollner. Key Dismukes played an important role as study director in the early stages of

OCR for page R1
About this PDF file: This new digital representation of the original work has been recomposed from XML files created from the original paper book, not from the original typesetting files. Page breaks are true to the original; line lengths, word breaks, heading styles, and other typesetting-specific formatting, however, cannot be retained, and some typographic errors may have been accidentally inserted. Please CONTENTS vii CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 CONTRAST SENSITIVITY FUNCTION 2 Background 2 Relationship Between Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity 4 Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity Function in Normal Vision 9 Contrast Sensitivity Function and Visual Performance 10 Suprathreshold Contrast Functions 13 Sensitivity to Phase 13 Conclusions and Recommendations 14 DARK-FOCUS: ANOMALOUS REFRACTIVE ERRORS AND ACCOMMODATION 14 Background 14 Low Visibility Conditions 16 Optical Corrections 17 The Mandelbaum Effect and Dirty Windscreens 18 Space Perception and Interactions With Binocular Vergence 18 Implications 19 Recommendations 19 Population Norms 20 Stability and Variation of the Dark-Focus 20 Clinical Measurement of the Dark-Focus 21 The Relationship Between Dark-Focus and Pilot Performance 21 DYNAMIC MEASURES 22 use the print version of this publication as the authoritative version for attribution. Dynamic Visual Acuity 22 Background 22 Implications 23 Recommendations 24 Dynamic Depth Tracking 24 Background 24 Conclusions and Recommendations 25 TWO MODES OF VISUAL PROCESSING 25 Background 25

OCR for page R1
About this PDF file: This new digital representation of the original work has been recomposed from XML files created from the original paper book, not from the original typesetting files. Page breaks are true to the original; line lengths, word breaks, heading styles, and other typesetting-specific formatting, however, cannot be retained, and some typographic errors may have been accidentally inserted. Please CONTENTS viii Implications 26 Spatial Disorientation and Motion Sickness 27 Vehicle Guidance and Night Driving 27 Visual Narrowing Under Stress and Cortical Brain Damage 27 Aircraft Instrumentation 28 Gaze Stability 28 Interaction Between Focal and Ambient Vision 28 Recommendations 29 SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS 29 APPENDIX A: BASIC FACTORS IN SPATIAL CONTRAST SENSITIVITY 31 Mean Luminance 31 Retinal Locus 31 Field Size 32 Temporal Characteristics 32 Orientation 34 APPENDIX B: DETECTION SENSITIVITY AND RESPONSE BIAS 37 High Threshold Model of Detection 38 Signal Detection Theory 38 Summary 43 APPENDIX C: BASIC CONCEPTS IN FOURIER ANALYSIS 44 Stimulus Specification 44 Linear Systems Analysis 46 Gabor Functions 47 APPENDIX D: THE USE OF TESTS FOR SCREENING AND SELECTION 49 Reliability 49 Accuracy 49 Validity 50 Screening and Selection 50 Summary 52 use the print version of this publication as the authoritative version for attribution. REFERENCES 53