The adverse impact of adjacent contours on letter visual acuity is known as crowding but there is conflicting evidence that foveal crowding may be reduced or disappears under low contrast conditions. Potential differences in foveal crowding with contrast on clinical measurements of visual acuity, including test-retest repeatability, were assessed. Visual acuity was measured at the fovea on adult participants with normal vision under three different contrast levels (- 90, - 10 and - 5%). Three rows of 5 letters, each row differing in size by 0.05 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) from largest to smallest were displayed at the center of a monitor. Crowding was varied by varying the separation between horizontally adjacent letters from 100% optotype size to 50%, 20% and 10% optotype size. Inter-row spacing was proportional to optotype size. Observers read the letters on the middle row only. Measurements continued by reducing the size of the letters until 3 or more errors were made and were repeated on two separate days. Visual acuity worsened as both letter contrast decreased and inter-optotype separation reduced (expressed as a percentage of letter width). When expressed in minutes of arc of separation the impact of crowding was the same across all contrasts. Crowding occurs for both high and low contrast charts and should be considered when assessing low contrast visual acuity. Test-retest repeatability showed little or no dependence on either contrast or inter-optotype separation.

Centre for Vision Across the Life Span Department of Optometry and Vision Sciences University of Huddersfield Huddersfield HD1 3DH UK

Department of Optics Palacký University Olomouc Olomouc Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Ricci F, Cedrone C, Cerulli L. Standardized measurement of visual acuity. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1998;5:41–53. PubMed

Bailey, I. L. in Borish's Clinical Refraction (ed W.J. Benjamin) 179–202 (W.B. Saunders, 1998).

Elliott DB, Sheridan M. The use of accurate visual acuity measurements in clinical anti-cataract formulation trials. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 1988;8:397–401. PubMed

Brown B, Lovie-Kitchin JE. High and low contrast acuity and clinical contrast sensitivity tested in a normal population. Optom. Vis. Sci. 1989;66:467–473. PubMed

Regan D, Neima D. Low-contrast letter charts as a test of visual function. Ophthalmology. 1983;90:1192–1200. PubMed

Balcer LJ, et al. Validity of low-contrast letter acuity as a visual performance outcome measure for multiple sclerosis. Mult. Scler. J. 2017;23:734–747. PubMed PMC

Johnson CA, Casson EJ. Effects of luminance, contrast, and blur on visual acuity. Optom. Vis. Sci. 1995;72:864–869. PubMed

Pelli D, Robson J, Wilkins A. The design of a new letter chart for measuring contrast sensitivity. Clin. Vis. Sci. 1988;2:187–199.

Ferris FL, Kassoff A, Bresnick GH, Bailey I. New visual acuity charts for clinical research. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 1982;94:91–96. PubMed

Pang Y, Sparschu L, Nylin E, Wang J. Validation of an automated early treatment diabetic retinopathy study low-contrast letter acuity test. Optom. Vis. Sci. 2020;97:370–376. doi: 10.1097/opx.0000000000001506. PubMed DOI PMC

Flom M. Contour interaction and the crowding effect. Probl. Optom. 1991;3:237–257.

Malania M, Herzog MH, Westheimer G. Grouping of contextual elements that affect vernier thresholds. J. Vis. 2007;7:1–7. PubMed

Sayim B, Westheimer G, Herzog MH. Contrast polarity, chromaticity, and stereoscopic depth modulate contextual interactions in vernier acuity. J. Vis. 2008;8:1–9. PubMed

Sayim B, Westheimer G, Herzog MH. Gestalt factors modulate basic spatial vision. Psychol. Sci. 2010;21:641–644. PubMed

Westheimer G, Hauske G. Temporal and spatial interference with vernier acuity. Vision. Res. 1975;15:1137–1141. PubMed

Butler TW, Westheimer G. Interference with stereoscopic acuity: Spatial, temporal, and disparity tuning. Vision. Res. 1978;18:1387–1392. PubMed

Ocansey S, Osuobeni E, Siderov J. Lateral interference, effects of flankers and reference bar configuration on foveal depth discrimination thresholds. Vision. Res. 2019;156:96–104. PubMed

Westheimer G, Truong TT. Target crowding in foveal and peripheral stereoacuity. Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 1988;65:395–399. PubMed

Levi DM. Crowding–An essential bottleneck for object recognition: A mini-review. Vision. Res. 2008;48:635–654. PubMed PMC

Whitney D, Levi DM. Visual crowding: A fundamental limit on conscious perception and object recognition. Trends Cognit. Sci. 2011;15:160–168. PubMed PMC

Jeon ST, Hamid J, Maurer D, Lewis TL. Developmental changes during childhood in single-letter acuity and its crowding by surrounding contours. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 2010;107:423–437. PubMed

Lalor SJ, Formankiewicz MA, Waugh SJ. Crowding and visual acuity measured in adults using paediatric test letters, pictures and symbols. Vision. Res. 2016;121:31–38. PubMed

Norgett Y, Siderov J. Crowding in children's acuity tests: Effect of test design and age. Optom. Vis. Sci. 2011;88:920–929. PubMed

Norgett Y, Siderov J. Foveal crowding differs in children and adults. J. Vis. 2014;14:1–10. PubMed

Ehrt O, Hess RF. Foveal contour interaction: Detection and discrimination. J. Opt. Soc. Am. (A) 2005;22:209–216. PubMed

Danilova MV, Bondarko VM. Foveal contour interactions and crowding effects at the resolution limit of the visual system. J. Vis. 2007;7:1–18. doi: 10.1167/7.2.25. PubMed DOI PMC

Atkinson, J., Pimm-Smith, E., Evans, C., Harding, G. & Braddick, O. Detection and Measurement of Visual Impairment in Pre-Verbal Children: Proceedings of a workshop held at the Institute of Ophthalmology, London on April 1–3, 1985, sponsored by the Commission of the European Communities as advised by the Committed on Medical Research (ed B. Jay) 201–213 (Springer, 1986).

Hess RF, Jacobs RJ. A preliminary report of acuity and contour interactions across the amblyope's visual acuity. Vision. Res. 1979;19:1403–1408. PubMed

Takahashi, E. S. Effects of Flanking Contours on Visual Resolution at Foveal and Near-Foveal Loci. PhD thesis (University of California, 1968).

Wolford G, Chambers L. Contour interaction as a function of retinal eccentricity. Percept. Psychophys. 1984;35:457–460. PubMed

Bailey, I. L., Raasch, T. W., Koh, P., Hetland, M. & Park, A. Ophthalmic and Visual Optics/Non-invasive Assessment of the Visual System Topic Meeting. (Optical Society of America, 2020)

Coates DR, Chin JM, Chung ST. Factors affecting crowded acuity: Eccentricity and contrast. Optom. Vis. Sci. 2013;90:628–638. PubMed PMC

Kothe AC, Regan D. Crowding depends on contrast. Optom. Vis. Sci. 1990;67:283–286. PubMed

Simmers AJ, Gray LS, McGraw PV, Winn B. Contour interaction for high and low contrast optotypes in normal and amblyopic observers. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 1999;19:253–260. PubMed

Tripathy SP, Cavanagh P. The extent of crowding in peripheral vision does not scale with target size. Vision. Res. 2002;42:2357–2369. PubMed

Pelli DG, Levi DM, Chung STL. Using visual noise to characterize amblyopic letter identification. J. Vis. 2004;4:904–920. PubMed PMC

Strasburger H, Harvey LO, Rentschler I. Contrast thresholds for identification of numeric characters in direct and eccentric view. Percept. Psychophys. 1991;49:495–508. PubMed

Siderov J, Waugh SJ, Bedell HE. Foveal contour interaction for low contrast acuity targets. Vision. Res. 2013;77:10–13. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2012.11.008. PubMed DOI

Siderov J, Waugh SJ, Bedell HE. Foveal contour interaction on the edge: Response to ‘Letter-to-the-Editor’by Drs. Coates and Levi. Vision Res. 2014;96:145–148. PubMed

Coates DR, Levi DM. Contour interaction in foveal vision: A response to Siderov, Waugh and Bedell 2013. Vision. Res. 2014;96:140–144. PubMed PMC

Lev M, Yehezkel O, Polat U. Uncovering foveal crowding? Sci. Rep. 2014;4:1–6. PubMed PMC

Siman-Tov Z, Lev M, Polat U. Binocular summation is affected by crowding and tagging. Sci. Rep. 2021;11:1–13. PubMed PMC

Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1–8476:307–310. PubMed

Carkeet A. Exact parametric confidence intervals for Bland-Altman limits of agreement. Optom. Vis. Sci. 2015;92:71–80. PubMed

Lovie-Kitchin JE, Brown B. Repeatability and intercorrelations of standard vision tests as a function of age. Optom. Vis. Sci. 2000;77:412–420. PubMed

Waldman AT, et al. High-and low-contrast letter acuity perception matures with age in normally sighted children. J. Neuroophthalmol. 2020;40:148–156. PubMed PMC

Cho P, Woo GC. Repeatability of the waterloo four-contrast LogMAR visual acuity chart and near vision test card on a group of normal young adults. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 2004;24:427–435. PubMed

Elliott DB, Bullimore MA. Assessing the reliability, discriminative ability, and validity of disability glare tests. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 1993;34:108–119. PubMed

Siderov J, Tiu AL. Variability of measurements of visual acuity in a large eye clinic. Acta Ophthalmol. 1999;77:673–676. PubMed

Reich L, Hoyt K. Crowding can steepen the psychometric function for visual acuity. Optom. Vision Sci. Suppl. 2002;79:233.

Coates DR, Levi DM, Touch P, Sabesan R. Foveal crowding resolved. Sci. Rep. 2018;8:9177. PubMed PMC

Chung STL, Levi DM, Legge GE. Spatial frequency and contrast properties of crowding. Vision. Res. 2001;41:1833–1850. PubMed

Kooi FL, Toet A, Tripathy SP, Levi DM. The effect of similarity and attention on contour interaction in peripheral vision. Spat. Vis. 1994;8:255–279. PubMed

Pelli DG, Palomares M, Majaj NJ. Crowding is unlike ordinary masking: Distinguishing feature integration from detection. J. Vis. 2004;4:1136–1169. doi: 10.1167/4.12.12. PubMed DOI

Pluháček F, Siderov J. Mesopic visual acuity is less crowded. Graefes Arch. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol. 2018;256:1739–1746. PubMed

van den Bosch ME, Wall M. Visual acuity scored by the letter-by-letter or probit methods has lower retest variability than the line assignment method. Eye. 1997;11:411–417. PubMed

Keppel G. Design and Analysis: A Researcher's Handbook. 2. Prentice-Hall; 1982.

Zadnik K, Mutti DO, Adams AJ. The repeatability of measurement of the ocular components. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 1992;33:2325–2333. PubMed

Lin RJ, Ng JS, Nguyen AL. Determinants and standardization of mesopic visual acuity. Optom. Vis. Sci. 2015;92:559–565. PubMed