Mathews S, Kruger P B
Schnurmacher Institute for Vision Research, State College of Optometry, State University of New York, NY 10010.
Vision Res. 1994 Aug;34(15):1965-80. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(94)90026-4.
We have investigated the spatiotemporal transfer function of human "reflex" accommodation. An accommodative mechanism that is sensitive to an intermediate temporal rate of retinal image contrast change is proposed as the basis of the fine focus control hypothesis. To test the proposed mechanism accommodative responses were monitored by a dynamic infrared optometer while the subject focused on sinusoidal gratings (0.98-10.5 c/deg) which were moving sinusoidally at temporal frequencies in the range of 0.05-0.80 Hz over a 0.50 or 2.00 D peak-to-peak amplitude. The accommodative responses were best at 3 and 5 c/deg at both amplitudes of target motion. This result does not support the proposed mechanism or the fine focus control hypothesis for "reflex" accommodation. Fitting the data with first-order response functions showed little evidence of prediction. In addition, a second experiment found that the profile of the accommodative gain function is not altered by instruction at spatial frequencies above 5 c/deg in this type of dynamic accommodation experiment. The use of sinusoidally moving accommodative blur targets, particularly with careful instruction, seems to discourage voluntary accommodation in investigations of "reflex" control mechanisms of accommodation.
我们研究了人类“反射性”调节的时空传递函数。一种对视网膜图像对比度变化的中间时间速率敏感的调节机制被提出作为精细聚焦控制假说的基础。为了测试所提出的机制,在受试者注视正弦光栅(0.98 - 10.5 周/度)时,通过动态红外验光仪监测调节反应,这些光栅在0.50或2.00 D峰 - 峰值幅度上以0.05 - 0.80 Hz范围内的时间频率作正弦运动。在目标运动的两个幅度下,调节反应在3和5周/度时最佳。该结果不支持所提出的机制或“反射性”调节的精细聚焦控制假说。用一阶反应函数拟合数据几乎没有预测的证据。此外,第二个实验发现,在这种类型的动态调节实验中,在高于5周/度的空间频率下,指令不会改变调节增益函数的轮廓。在对调节的“反射性”控制机制的研究中,使用正弦运动的调节性模糊目标,特别是在有仔细指令的情况下,似乎会抑制自主调节。