Cognitive workload affects ocular accommodation and pupillary response

SIGNIFICANCE

Cognitive involvement in reading causes variations in the tonus of autonomic nerve system. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of short-term cognitive load on accommodation and pupils' absolute values and temporal variability in test persons performing three different types of tasks.

PURPOSE

We aimed to show how cognitive tasks of different type and difficulty level affect accommodation and pupil behavior during a short time interval.

METHODS

Participants (n = 58; mean age 16.4 years, SD = 0.56) performed reading from a 10-inch LCD screen placed at 40 cm distance. Three different types of tasks (numerical, textual, and the Stroop task), each at three different levels of cognitive load were introduced. Participants had 90 s to complete each task. Accommodative and pupillary responses were measured with videoretinoscope Power Refractor 3 at 50 Hz.

RESULTS

Pupil size was largest in the Stroop task (M = 5.20 mm, SD = 0.75 mm), followed by the numerical tasks (M = 5.02 mm, SD = 0.72 mm) and textual tasks (M = 4.78 mm, SD = 0.71 mm). Accommodative fluctuations - measured as accommodation SD - were largest in the textual tasks (M = 0.67 D, SD = 0.34 D), followed by the numerical tasks (M = 0.61 D, SD = 0.40 D) and the Stroop task (M = 0.52 D, SD = 0.21 D).

CONCLUSIONS

In our experiment, short-term cognitive load was associated with altered pupillary and accommodative response to near tasks. In conflicting tasks (Stroop) or in performing continuing calculations, the pupils were larger; in tasks requiring logical reasoning, the accommodative fluctuations were greater. These effects can potentially be associated with current near-point stress and myopia growth models.

The influence of proprioception on reading performance

BACKGROUND

Visual ergonomics has an impact on visual performance in reading. Based on the assumption that reading from an LCD screen held in the hands provides more accurate information about the distance to the object than reading from a screen, which has no contact with our body, this study assessed the influence of the proprioceptive input on the speed of reading and on accommodative and pupillary responses and their micro-oscillations.

METHODS

Participants (n = 47; all emmetropic, non-amblyopic), were asked to read in their minds two-digit numerals presented on a 10-inch LCD screen at 40 cm distance. In one condition, the participants held the screen in their hands; in the other, the screen was placed on the holder and there was no body contact with the participant. The number of numerals read in 90 seconds was recorded. Accommodative and pupillary responses were measured with Power Refractor 3 at a 50 Hz measurement rate.

RESULTS

The number of numerals read was greater for the condition with proprioceptive input than in the condition without contact. The mean pupil size and the average accommodative response were similar in the two conditions. The rate of change in pupil size showed a steeper decline in the condition without the proprioceptive input compared to the condition with this input. The increase in the lag of accommodation with time was similar in both conditions, as well as pupillary and accommodative micro-oscillations.

CONCLUSIONS

When the screen was held in the hands, reading of numerals was faster and resulted in less pupil size change over the 90-second test interval. This indicates that proprioception might influence some aspects of visual performance.

Individually designed PALs vs. power optimized PALs adaptation comparison

The practice shows that in everyday life we encounter ever-growing demand for better visual acuity at all viewing distances. The presbyopic population needs correction to far, near and intermediate distance with different dioptric powers. PAL lenses seem to be a comfortable solution. The object of the present study is the analysis of the factors determining adaptation to progressive addition lenses (PAL) of the first-time users. Only novice test persons were chosen in order to avoid the bias of previously worn particular lens design. For optimal results with this type of lens, several individual parameters must be considered: correct refraction, precise ocular and facial measures, and proper mounting of lenses into the frame. Nevertheless, first time wearers encounter various difficulties in the process of adapting to this type of glasses and adaptation time differs greatly between individual users. The question that arises is how much the individual parameters really affect the ease of adaptation and comfort when wearing progressive glasses. To clarify this, in the present study, the individual PAL lenses--Rodenstock's Impression FreeSign (with inclusion of all parameters related to the user's eye and spectacle frame: prescription, pupillary distance, fitting height, back vertex distance, pantoscopic angle and curvature of the frame) were compared to power optimized PAL--Rodenstock's Multigressiv MyView (respecting only prescription power and pupillary distance). Adaptation process was monitored over a period of four weeks. The collected results represent scores of user's subjective impressions, where the users themselves rated their adaptation to new progressive glasses and the degree of subjective visual impression. The results show that adaptation time to fully individually fit PAL is easier and quickly. The information obtained from users is valuable in everyday optometry practice because along with the manufacturer's specifications, the user's experience can give us a better insight in design and characteristics of progressive lenses.