Correcting visual acuity beyond 20/20 improves contour element detection and integration: A cautionary tale for studies of special populations.

ABSTRACT: Contrary to popular lore, optimal visual acuity is typically better than 20/20. Could correcting acuity beyond 20/20 offer any benefit? An affirmative answer could present new confounds in studies of aging, development, psychiatric illness, neurodegenerative disorders, or any other population where refractive error might be more likely. An affirmative answer would also offer a novel explanation of inter-observer variability in visual performance. To address the question, we had individuals perform two well-studied visual tasks, once with 20/20 vision and once with optical correction, so that observers could see one line better on an eye chart. In the contour integration task, observers sought to identify the screen quadrant location of a sparsely defined (integrated) shape embedded in vary

SUBMITTER: Keane BP 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11426532 | biostudies-literature | 2024

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature