PURPOSE: To determine the effects of stimulus eccentricity and luminance level on the reaction time (RT) of young normal volunteers during automated kinetic campimetry. METHODS: We used a specially designed video-campimetric device equipped with a continuous infrared (IR) pupillographic fixation control (Tübingen Computer Campimeter) and recorded reaction times upon presenting horizontally moving small circular stimuli (size 26'; constant angular velocity 2 degrees /s) starting at 16 locations within the central 30 degrees -radius of the visual field. Two different levels of stimulus luminance were used (41.6 cd/m(2) and 110 cd/m(2)), while background luminance was 10 cd/m(2). Each stimulus was presented a total of six times in a randomized order. Subjects were 12 healthy young individuals (aged 21-30 years) with normal ophthalmic examinations. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed on the data. RESULTS: RTs showed considerable inter- and intra-individual variation with individual least squares means (LSM, fitted values of a linear model) ranging from 305 to 454 ms, and residual standard deviation (R.S.D.) 66 ms. Reaction times did not differ significantly as a function of stimulus direction (P>0.6). Higher luminance levels produced significantly reduced reaction times for all stimulus locations and directions (mean reduction: 16 ms; P<0.0001). Reaction times increased with increasing eccentricity, in the mean by 1.8 ms per degree of visual angle, from 365+/-4 ms (S.E.M.) foveally, to 407+/-2 ms at 30 degrees eccentricity; (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Automated kinetic perimetry should be designed to cope with significant, variable interindividual response characteristics. Other stimulus related factors, such as eccentricity or luminance level, have a significant but comparatively small effect on reaction time within the central 30 degrees -radius visual field in healthy young individuals.
PURPOSE: To determine the effects of stimulus eccentricity and luminance level on the reaction time (RT) of young normal volunteers during automated kinetic campimetry. METHODS: We used a specially designed video-campimetric device equipped with a continuous infrared (IR) pupillographic fixation control (Tübingen Computer Campimeter) and recorded reaction times upon presenting horizontally moving small circular stimuli (size 26'; constant angular velocity 2 degrees /s) starting at 16 locations within the central 30 degrees -radius of the visual field. Two different levels of stimulus luminance were used (41.6 cd/m(2) and 110 cd/m(2)), while background luminance was 10 cd/m(2). Each stimulus was presented a total of six times in a randomized order. Subjects were 12 healthy young individuals (aged 21-30 years) with normal ophthalmic examinations. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed on the data. RESULTS: RTs showed considerable inter- and intra-individual variation with individual least squares means (LSM, fitted values of a linear model) ranging from 305 to 454 ms, and residual standard deviation (R.S.D.) 66 ms. Reaction times did not differ significantly as a function of stimulus direction (P>0.6). Higher luminance levels produced significantly reduced reaction times for all stimulus locations and directions (mean reduction: 16 ms; P<0.0001). Reaction times increased with increasing eccentricity, in the mean by 1.8 ms per degree of visual angle, from 365+/-4 ms (S.E.M.) foveally, to 407+/-2 ms at 30 degrees eccentricity; (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Automated kinetic perimetry should be designed to cope with significant, variable interindividual response characteristics. Other stimulus related factors, such as eccentricity or luminance level, have a significant but comparatively small effect on reaction time within the central 30 degrees -radius visual field in healthy young individuals.