The Influence of Stimulus Size on Measured Visual Field Extent in Infants

Optometry and Vision Science

Volumn 80, Issue 10, 2003, Pages 698-702

  Dobson, Velma ^a,b   Baldwin, Meigan B ^a   Mohan, Kathleen M ^a   Delaney, Suzanne M ^a,b   Harvey, Erin M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b University of Arizona   (United States)

Author keywords

Infants; Monocular visual field extent; Perimetry; Stimulus size

Indexed keywords

MEASUREMENT THEORY; OPHTHALMOLOGY;

VISUAL FIELDS;

VISION;

ADULT; ARTICLE; EYE MOVEMENT; HUMAN; INFANT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEASUREMENT; PERIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL STIMULATION;

ADULT; HUMANS; INFANT; MIDDLE AGED; PERIMETRY; VISION, MONOCULAR; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 0142040693     PISSN: 10405488     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00006324-200310000-00011     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Henson DB. Visual Fields. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.
2. Mayer DL, Fulton AB. Development of the human visual field. In Simons K, ed. Early Visual Development, Normal and Abnormal. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993:117-29.
3. Maurer D, Lewis TL. Overt orienting toward peripheral stimuli: normal development and underlying mechanisms. In: Richards JE, ed. Cognitive Neuroscience of Attention: a Developmental Perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1998:51-102.
4. Mohan KM, Dobson V. When does measured visual field extent become adult-like? It depends. In: Lakshminarayanan V, ed. OSA Trends in Optics and Photonics. Vision Science and Its Applications, Vol 35. OSA Technical Digest Series. Washington, DC: Optical Society of America, 2000:2-17.
5. Choplin NT, Sherwood MB, Spaeth GL. The effect of stimulus size on the measured threshold values in automated perimetry. Ophthalmology 1990;97:371-4.
6. Faubert J. Effect of target size, temporal frequency, and luminance on temporal modulation visual fields. In: Mills RP, Heijl A, eds. Perimetry Update 1990/1. Amsterdam: Kugler, 1991:381-90.
7. Ferree CE, Rand G. Two important factors in the size and shape of the form field and some of their relations to practical perimetry. J Gen Psychol 1932;6:414-28.
8. Johnson CA, Kelmer JL, Balestrery F. Effects of target size and eccentricity on visual detection and resolution. Vision Res 1978;18:1217-22.
9. Lewis TL, Maurer D. The development of the temporal and nasal visual fields during infancy. Vision Res 1992;32:903-11.
10. Schneck ME, Hamer RD, Packer OS, Teller DY. Area-threshold relations at controlled retinal locations in 1-month-old infants. Vision Res 1984;24:1753-63.
11. Hamer RD, Schneck ME. Spatial summation in dark-adapted human infants. Vision Res 1984, 24:77-85.
12. Mohan KM, Dobson V, Harvey EM. Does attention to a dynamic central task differentially affect measured visual field extent in adults when using two different peripheral target sizes? Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2001;42:S387.