The developmental dynamic visual acuity status of elementary students
by Doreen Alice Heintz
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE
in Physical Education
Montana State University
© Copyright by Doreen Alice Heintz (1977)
Abstract:
The purpose of the study was to determine the dynamic visual acuity status of elementary age children,
Dynamic visual acuity was defined as the ability of an observer to detect the detail of an object when
there is relative movement between the observer and the object. The test for dynamic visual acuity
consisted of the individual identifying a distinct portion (checkerboard design) of a moving target slide
that moved across a 180° cylindrical screen. The test was conducted in three parts as the target slides
moved at. three predetermined speeds (60° per second, 90° per second, and 120° per second,) In each
part of the test, the targets on the slides were large and got progressively smaller as the test continued.
By means of analysis of variance, a comparison of three variables (grade level differences, sex
differences, and eye preference differences) to the dynamic visual acuity test was considered. Also,
interaction effects of the variables was considered, Main conclusions made from the study included the
following: 1) a difference between grade levels and the dynamic visual acuity test was found to exist;
2) a difference between the dynamic visual acuity scores was seen between males and females; 3) no
difference was seen on the dynamic visual acuity test between children who had left or right eye
preference; and 4) no interaction effects between grade level differences and eye preference
differences, grade level differences and sex differences, or sex differences and eye preference
differences was noted. STATEMENT OF PERMISSION TO COPY
In presenting this thesis in partial fullfillment of the
requirements for an advanced degree at Montana State University, I
agree that the Library shall make it freely available for inspection,
I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis
for scholarly purposes may be granted by my major professor, or, in
his absence, by the Director, of Libraries,
It is understood that
ary copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall
not be allowed without my written permission.
THE DEVELOPMENTAL DYNAMIC VISUAL ACUITY STATUS OF ELETdENTARY STUDENTS
by
DOREEN ALICE HEINTZ
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree
of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
Physical Education
Approved*
Chairperson^" G^duA teCom^ttee
Headf m y c r Depamnent
Jy
Graduate Dean
. MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY
Bozetnans Montana,
August r 1977
ill
I
•
'
-
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author wishes to thank Dr 6 G 6 S 0 Don Morris for All his
time and wisdom in helping complete the study.
A special thanks goes
also to Dr. Ellen Krelghbaum, Dr 0 Albert Suvak, and Herb Agocs for
their contributions during the completion of the Study6
The author is indebted to the many people who helped in the
collection of the data— to Judy Halra and Priscilla Fleseh for all
their time in assisting with the testing procedures, to the principal
and teachers at Irving Elementary School who made the students avail"
able to the investigator, and,, finally, to the students at Irving
Elementary School who made the study, possiblee
Also, the author is grateful to Edith Breitmeier, her sister-"
Debbi Kramer, and her mother for all their work in helping prepare
and type the final copy.
TABLE CF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES, . .
vii
LIST OF FIGURES . .
ix
Chapter
I,
09 00 I
INTRODUCTION
STATEMENT OF GENERAL AND SPECIFIC PROBLEMS. O O O O O O
I
DEFINITION OF .TERMS USED IN STUDY . . . . . 0 9 9 0 0 0
I
DELIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY. . . ..........
e•»o 3
LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY.
»00.
3
......
4
^
JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY,
2e SURVEY OF RELATED.LITERATURE, . . . . . . . .
VISUAL PERCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT IN CHILDREN .
. . «. o
STUDIES RELATING STATIC VISUAL ACUITY AND
DYNAMIC VISUAL ACUITY ...............* .
• 0 . 6 13
DYNAMIC VISUAL ACUITY STUDIES .
»
0
*
0
*
9
DYNAMIC VISUAL ACUITY AND ITS RELATIONSHIP
TO SPORTS PERFORMANCE . . . . . . . . . .
.SUMMARY
’» * 6 . . .
0
0
*
0
0
9
, 0 . 6 0 0
e»
14
18
. 0 0 6 0 , 21
60 . 0
METHODS AND PROCEDURES. . . . . . . . . . . .
6
23
JUSTIFICATION OF THE DESIGN
0 0 6 0 23
HYPOTHESES FOR THE STUDY. .................
0 0 0 o' 24
SAMPLE FOR THE STUDY.
EQUIPMENT USED IN THE STUDY
.
24
0 0 0 0 25
V
Chapter
^agc
TESTING PROCEDURE AND DATA COLLECTION . . . .
4.
o ....
26
SCHEDULE OF DATA COLLECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
28
ANALYSIS OF DATA e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
28
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION CF DATA, . . . . . . . . . . . . .
30
PRESENTATION OF THE RESULTS ...................
30
Results Contrasting Grade Differences
and DVA Test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 30,
Results Contrasting Eye Preference
Differences and DVA Test* . . . . . . . . . . . . o
33
Results Contrasting Sex Differences
and DVA‘Test. , . , , . . e
.
33
Results Contrasting Grade Differences
and Eye Preference Differences. . . . . . . . . . .
36
Results Contrasting Sex Differences
and Grade Differences
38
.
.
.
*
Results Contrasting Sex Differences
and Eye Preference Differences. . , . . . « . , . « 3 9
Results Related to Hypotheses
DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS
5.
41
^
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION'S, AND "RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . .
^
42
o » 45
SUMMARY . . . e e o e e e e e . . . . . . . » « • « . «
45
CONCLUSIONS
46
RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o
46
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o
50
vi
Page
APPENDIXES
APPENDIX A . .
APPENDIX B . .
APPENDIX C . .
APPENDIX D , .
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table
I,
Page
Least-Squares Mean for Grade Levels
and DVA Test# # # # # # # # # # # # 0 0 0 0 # # » #
2 0 Analysis of Variance, Contrasting Grade
;
Differences and DVA Test# . # , # . # # 0 «'» « « 0
3«
4,
5#
Least-Squares Mean for Eye Preference
and DVA Test# # # # # # # # # # # # # #
e . 31
« » 0 32
#-*0 ® # #
Analysis of Variance, Contrasting Left and Right
Eye Preference and DVA Test
y
'
Least-Squares Mean for Male and Female Subjects
and DVA Test# # # # # # # # # # # . # * # » # # # # _ #
0 e 33
0 . 34
. . 35
6 # Analysis of Variance, Contrasting Male and
Female Subjects and DVA Test# # « # . « # # # * • #
7$
Least-Squares Mean for Grade Levels and
Eye Preference.
. 6 36
. . 37
8 . Analysis of Variance, Contrasting Grade Differences
and Left and Right Eye Preferences# # . # . , « , «
9#
Least-Squares Mean for Grade Levels and
Male and Female Subjects# « ........
# 6 38
1 i 38
IOe
Analysis of Variance, Contrasting Grade Differences
and Male and Female Subjects. . . « . .'#-,# »
# » , . 39
11,
Least-Squares Mean for Male and Female Subjects
and-Left and Right Eye Preferences, #,« ., , .
12*
. . e e 40
Analysis of Variance, Contrasting Male and Female
Subjects and Left and Right -Eye Preferences » # . .
*
a
41
viii
Ifege
Table
13.
14.
Visual Acuity Equivalents of Visual Anglese
expressed in minutes of arc, and Snellen
Ratings,
Raw Data
33
« * 0 0 0 0 « 56
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure .
Fage
Ie
Target Slide
2,
DVA Score Sheet
e
e e t o e e e e o
o
. 53
5t
X
ABSTRACT
The purpose of the study was to determine the dynamic visual
acuity status of elementary age children, . JGynamic visual acuity was
defined as the ability of an observer to detect the detail of an ob­
ject when there is relative movement between the observer and the
object. The test for dynamic visual acuity consisted of the individ­
ual identifying a distinct portion (checkerboard design) of a moving
target slide that moved across a 180° cylindrical screen. The test
was conducted in three parts as the target slides moved at. three
predetermined speeds (6ti° per second, 90° per second, and 120° per
second,) In each part of the test, the targets on the slides were
large and got progressively smaller as the test continued.
By means of analysis of variance, a comparison of three vari­
ables (grade level differences, sex differences, and eye preference
differences) to the dynamic visual acuity test .was considered. Also,
interaction effects of the variables was considered.
Ikin conclusions made from the study included the following*
I) a difference between grade levels and the dynamic visual acuity
test was found to exist; 2 ) a difference between.the dynamic visual
acuity scores was seen between males and females; 3 ) no difference
was seen on the dynamic visual acuity test between children who had
left or right eye preference; and 4) no interaction effects between
grade level differences and eye preference differences, grade level
differences and sex differences, or sex differences and eye prefer­
ence differences was noted.
Chapter I
INTRODUCTION
STATEMENT OF GENERAL AND SPECIFIC PROBLEMS
The purpose of the study was to measure the developmental
dynamic visual acuity status of students in grades one through four
at Irving Elementary School in Boseman, Montana,
Specifically, an
attempt was made to I ) compare the dynamic visual acuity status
among the different grades of students, 2) compare the dynamic visual
acuity status among students who'had different eye -preference, and
3) compare the dynamic .visual acuity status' "between males and fe­
males.
DEFINITION OF TERMS USED IN STUDY
The following terms were defined by the investigator to
provide a better understanding of the study*,
Dynamic Visual Acuity,
Dynamic visual acuity is the ability
of an observer to detect the detail of an object when there is rel­
ative movement between the observer and the object.
Dynamic visual
acuity is sometimes known as DVA.
Static Visual Acuity.
Static visual acuity is the ability
of the visual system to discriminate the detail of stationary objects
in the field of vision
2
Perception,
As defined by Larson (16:11),
, , a Perception is an activity of the mind intermediate between
sensation and thought. It is the mental process which gives
meaning to the. given sensation and acts as a preliminary to
thinking. Perception is that which, enables the individual to
organize and come to understand the environment around him.
Visual Perception,
Visual perception is that part of per­
ception that has to do with the organization of visual'stimuli*
In
order for this process to occur, a sensory input, is received by the
visual receptors.
brain.
The nervous system, relays the information to the ■
In the brain the process in which past information, e, g.,
memory, is used so a message can be sent to the muscles after which
an .observable behavior can occur.
Eye Preference.
most depends.
Eye preference is the eye on which a person
Just as a person is usually left- or right-handed, he
also usually has a dominate eye,
Oculo-Rotator, .An oculo-rotator is a machine that has a
variable speed mechanism on it which allows a mirror to',rotate at
different speeds.
The oculo-rotator is manually manipulated to
establish the different "speeds.
Target Slides,
distinct parts.
A target slide is a slide which has five
Out of these five parts, one part is different from
the other parts (checkerboard design).
The checkerboard can be lo­
cated in one of four places on the slides
up, down, right, or left.
3
In the dynamic visual acuity test, each subject must identify where
the checkboard design is on each target slide.
Students at Irving Elementary School, The study involved
■
"■
.. .
students in grades one through four who were enrolled at Irving
'
Elementary School in Bozeman, Montana during the course of the test­
ing which took place fall and winter quarters, of 1976-77,
DELIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
The study was delimited to students in grades one
four who'were enrolled at Irving Elementary School,
through
Testing occurred
during fall and winter quarters of the school year 1976-77,
more, the study was delimited to measuring dynamic visual
Further­
.acuity and
eye preference.
LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
Although all students were tested during the afternoon hours,
of the school day, no attempt was made to control the students8
activities immediately prior to the administration of the test.
Another limitation of the study was the operation of the equip'
'
ment during testing.
precisely.
It was assumed that the equipment operated
4
JUSTIFICATION OF THB STUDY
The development of visual perception is seen to develop early
in infants as evidenced "by Cratty (9*69)0
e e .For example, the infant is seen to. track moving objects at
birth, and by the sixth month he performs this task quite well
for increasingly longer periods of time when objects move in
arcs through his space field at various speeds.
Cratty (9169) further stated, though, that this development is not
complete until a later age.
It thus appears, upon surveying the available' evidence, that
complex spatial perceptions involving.the-perceptual :anticipation
of rapidly moving objects in space, coupled with-locomotor and
manual responses necessary to control them-, are not .seen to
mature until, late childhood. Even though visual perceptual development is evidenced in
young children, it is an area in which little research has been done
and no real conclusions have been reached by previous investigations.
Movement perception is one area where no real conclusions have been
reached, as reported by Kidd and Rivoire (l5il02-03).
Perhaps movement, ttib most primitive of all visual percep­
tions, may be thought of as favoring detail perception, provided
the movement is-not too fast or too slow. It is, therefore, the
development of perception of detail in movement that is of spe­
cial interest to psychology. Research on this type of perception,
however, is highly scattered, cross-sectional, unorganized, and
still in a very elementary stage, and far less- research has been
done in this area compared to research into other visual pro­
cesses. What variables there are to be studied in tracing this
development are still relatively undetermined$. they ,have not
even been identified by preliminary research. Indeed, a refined
longitudinal study of this process is greatly needed.
5
Based upon this earlier evidence, an attempt was made by the investi­
gator to provide a study which contributed to the body of information
in the area of movement perception#
Dynamic visual acuity was one area that could be explored in
the area of dynamic visual perception#
The investigator chose the
area of dynamic visual acuity because it was an area which does not
involve a motor response, such as catching.a ball with his or her
hands, as seen in other areas, of dynamic visual perception#
By
adding the variable of motor coordination relative to visual percep­
tion, accurate interpretations of findings were difficult#
By using
the target type of test as was employed in a dynamic visual acuity
study, the task of a motor response was eliminated#
Earlier studies in the area of dynamic visual acuity by
Burg and Hulbert (?) and Morris and Kreighbaum (l?) have confined
themselves to adult subjects#
In the interest of seeing the develop­
ment of younger children, the investigator chose to study the de­
velopment
of elementary age children#
Cratty (8 ) performed a similar study to the one proposed
here#
It was. the purpose of his study to explore the dynamic visual
acuity status of children from the ages of five to twelve years#
Chapter 2
SURVEY OF RELATED LITERATURE
The survey, of related literature consists of four major
I) visual perceptual development in children, 2) studies
topics!
relating static visual acuity and dynamic visual acuity, 3) dynamic
visual acuity studies, and 4) dynamic visual acuity and its relation­
ship to sports performance.
VISUAL PERCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT IN CHILDR#
In order to understand visual perception, one must realize
that visual perception depends on more than just the eye.
Visual
perception is a process which involves the eye, brain, and sensory
pathways.
Begbie (4s3*4) reported the following:
, , ,But optics and anatomy are not the only types o f ■science
needed in studying the eye. The.retina, which receives the light
patterns, sends information b y .nervous pathways to the brain,
and we have to know how this information is transmitted along
nerves by physiochemical processes, and what limits are. put by '
these processes upon the kind of message that can be .sent, A
further fundamental problem arises here. The number of nerve
pathways leaving the retina is much fewer than the number of
separate receptive areas in the retina itself. The latter there­
fore appears to act as a kind of processing center where a lot
of diverse items are sorted out and sent on their way in fewer
categories. Further reorganization takes place at still another
site in the brain (the lateral geniculate body) before the visual
information reaches that part of the brain (the occipital cortex)
which we associate with vision. Even at the cortex, more resort­
ing takes place. .In addition to all this, what we finally "see!*
is influenced by many other factors— simultaneous information
7
from other senses, memory, etc*
ways and connections.
This implies more nervous path­
In addition to.the internal factors that must play a part in
our seeing, there is also an external factor that is important— th e .
head and eyes working together,
Gibson (12:29) discussed the effects
of eye and head movements.
The visual field shifts whenever the eyes are moved from one
fixation point to another, since the eyes normally play over the
visual environment in much the same way that a searchlight moves
over a night sky except that light is being absorbed by them in­
stead of emitted* Scanning movements of this sort are termed
saccadic eye movements, and are rapid jerks of very brief dura­
tion* If the shifts of fixation are wide the head also moves in
the same direction as the eyes and, as a result, the boundaries
of the visual field formed by the eyelids and nose sweep across
the array of colored patches*
Not only is the operation of the head and eyes important in
seeing, but also the perception of the visual world is important.
Gibson (12s10) described it in the following ways
The problem of how we perceive the visual world can be di­
vided into two problems to be considered separately, first, the.
perception of the substantial or spatial world, and, second,
the perception of the world of useful and significant things
to which we ordinarily attend. The first is the world of colors,
textures, surfaces, edges, slopes, shapes, and interspaces. The
second is the more familiar world with which we are usually con­
cerned, a world of objects, places, signals, and written symbols,
The latter shifts from time to time depending on what we are
doing at the moment, whereas the former remains a more or less
constant background for our experiences, and a sort of support
for maintaining posture and for moving about* The world of
significant things is too complex to be attended to all at
once, and our perception of it is selective. Certain features
8
stand out prominently, others are neglected* It is sometimes
said that our perception is distorted and falsified by this fact.
To see how visual perception develops in a child, a chrono­
logical overview is presented, beginning from the birth of the child
and proceeding to adolescence.
Major emphasis is on movement per­
ception, as this is the part of visual perception that is important
in the study of dynamic visual acuity.
It is hard to; place a certain
age for seeing certain characteristics because the order of sequence
seems to be similar from child to child, but the age at.which the
specific patterns make their appearance will vary with each indivi­
dual child,
Gesell (11:78) reported the following about vision develop­
ment which begins at births
When does this newborn baby begin to use his eyes? He is
visually sensitive to light from the moment of birth. Although
his eyes are prevailingly closed, they are far from inactive.
The eyeballs frequently make short lateral excursions, even under
closed lids, . .Repeatedly the eyes open, more or less complete­
ly, in unison or singly. The head extends or rotates slightly
from time to time. Occasionally the eyes open and immobilize
as though to stare,
Cratty (9*71) reported that infants seem to track moving objects at
birth, but he noted that there was a tendency for the head and eyes
not to work in unison,
"Characteristically, the head will lag behind
as the eyes follow an object moving across the space field,"
9
Kidd and Rivoire (15:103) also reported on the seemingly
early development of movement perception seen in infants.
Probably the earliest, most primitive perceptions available
to a child is that of movement. It has been noted that premature
babies pursued a slowly moving light with their eyes (Kassmaul,
1859* Kroner, 1881), Preyer (1882, 1888) noticed that at about
the third week eyes could follow slowly moving objects, while
Peterson and Rainer (1910) recorded that in the first eight
days a baby would follow a light, Jones (1926) made, a study
of visual pursuit in an infant and found that horizontal pur­
suit movements were first consistently present at about one
month, and the median age being 58 days, that consistent ver­
tical and circular pursuit occurred about the 51st day, median
ages for these types of pursuit being 68.and 75 days respectively.
Depth perception, even though primitive, also seems to de­
velop at an early age.
Infants, as early as one-and-one-half to
two months, seem to be able to perceive features bf our environment,
Gesell (ll) reported that binocular convergence^ appeared, on the
average, by the end of the second month.
From earlier observations
made by Gesell on the development of monocularity and binocular!ty,
Williams (23:125-26) reported the following:
In the newborn infant (2-3 days old), neither true mono­
cularity nor binocularity as such seem to be present. Within ■
the first week, however, monocularity begins to dominate the
child's visual processes and he seems to be more adept .at using .
a single eye than in using the two eyes together (Gesell, 1949),
With continuing growth, a transitional period occurs— a period
which is clearly marked by the alternating use of monocularity
Ilhe ability to focus both eyes on an object and. thus a fore­
runner of true depth perception.
10
and Mnocularity in viewing the environment or objects in the
environment (one to two months), Binocularitys however, be­
comes the primary force in vision at about two months and much
advancement can be noted in the coordinated use of the two. eyes
in the weeks and months that follow (Pants, 1961; Gesell, 1949)«
Fixation and pursuit movements of the eyes are also important
in the development of visual perception, as reported by Williams
(23 1128-29 )/
.
Fixation processes proceed from a very unstable regard or
focusing of objects in "near" space (0-2 weeks) to an intense
and precise fixation of such objects in "far" space. Finally
the child is able to look out into far space while maintaining
specific fixation of an object in near' space (1-2 years). In
pursuit movements, there is a progression from a very unstable
and awkward following of a moving target for simple and brief .
excursions (0-4 weeks) to an easy and accurate pursuance of
"faster" moving targets through more complicated paths (5**6
years). These visual powers, which at the outset are simple
and primitive, attain a higher level of functional complexity
by the age of six*
When a child adds locomotion to his body functions, there
is also a continuing improvement in his vision development, as the
increased locomotion allows for increased -experience in the visual
world.
In fact, Cratty (9$81) stated that by the age of two years
a child's ocular apparatus is mature in many ways.
The eyes track through a wide range of- angles and speeds
and many children are well coordinated in these efforts. The
size and weight of the eyeball approach adult dimensions; pupil­
lary reflexes and fibrillation also are nearly mature, At the
same time the perceptual development of the infant is far from
complete, , ,His most obvious problem is the inability to co­
ordinate his motor effects when attempting to deal with rapid
movement is his space field.
11
Williams (23) reported that the typical two-year-old is at­
tracted by movements of almost any kind.
Distance and space percep­
tion is also becoming more sophisticated,
Gesell (ll:12l) reported
that the three-year-old is displaying a new interest in orientating
himself with his space world,
"He displays a new interest in land­
marks, recognizing and anticipating them when he is away from home,
out for a walk, or a ride,"
At the age of five, or six years the typical child will start
school, so it is not until this time that many vision problems will
be noted.
In a study by Gratty (8 s5)* five perceptual factors were
identified as typical of a five-year-old.
Studies with young children have made it clear that visual
perceptual behaviors by the age of five years.are highly specific
and diffuse. The investigations by Smith and his colleagues,
for example, resulted in the computations- of a factor structure.
which is similar to that seen in adulthood. In essence, they
found that there were at least five independent visual-perceptual
factors evidenced by the five-year-old, consisting of visual
acuity, ability to make judgments about moving objects, the
ability to fractionalise space efficiently (to estimate what is
half-way between two objects), depth perception, and distance
perception (judgments of the relative placement of two objects,
without references to the position of the perceiver),
As one can see, the visual perceptions of the child con­
tinues to improve,
Williams (23:13$) reported the following:
At five, the child can follow a target moving at increased
rates of speed and through fairly complex paths, At seven the
child can follow this object as it moves downward toward him .
more easily than he.can if it is moving upward. The seven-year-
12
old seems, however, to have little difficulty in pursuing ob­
jects which move horizontally across his visual field.
Eight- and nine-year-olds have made considerable progress
in their ability to judge the speed and direction of a moving .
target and rarely overshoot or lag behind it in their visual
pursuit movements. Still children of this age are greatly in­
fluenced in their judgments of range of speed of movement by
the total situation in which the movement occurs,
'
Also of special interest in the development of visual per­
ception is how children organize the dimensions of their sjace.field,
Cratty (9$?9) describes it in this ways
The available evidence indicates that children, as they
mature, seem to organize the various dimensions of their space .
field in a reasonably orderly sequence. First to mature are
the vertical dimensions,., followed by the recognition and or­
ganization of the horizontal,. The more complex oblique or
diagonal dimensions of the space field are the last to become
organized by the child.
In a study by Bogard (5s5l)» the difference in dynamic and
static visual perception of figure-ground was examined.
The per­
ception of figure-ground involves the ability to distinguish a-figure
from a field or ground.
The results of Bogard* s (5$51) study were
the following:
Within the limits and design of this study, it was concluded
that there is a difference between static and dynamic visual
perception of figure-ground at the four age levels elementary
grade one, elementary grade six, college, and elderly adult
studied and that perception .of figure-ground is developmental
in nature. Performance on tests.of figure-ground, tends to
improve with age.
13
STUDIES RELATING STATIC VISUAL ACUITY
AND DYNAMIC VISUAL ACUITY
Early research done in the area of visual perception dealt
mostly with static visual acuity.
In comparing definitions of the
two acuity terms, one ,sees that static visual acuity deals with no
movement between the observer and the object being observed,- while
dynamic visual acuity deals with some sort of movement relative to
the observer or the object being observed.
The most widely used test
in measuring static visual acuity is the Snellen test.
Researchers
are now questioning what the best indicator of visual acuity, is-=
static visual acuity or dynamic visual acuity.
Related to this
questioning is the following statement by Burg (6:460);
This increased interest is an outgrowth of the realisation
that for many activities, such as driving,.flying, ball playing,
and the like, discrimination of moving objects (or of station­
ary objects while one is moving) plays a key role^ and, there­
fore, that performance on a dynamic acuity test may be more
closely correlated with task performance than is the score
obtained on a test of static (or standard) acuity.
Because of the questioning, there have been studies done ■
to see if there is a correlation between dynamic and static acuity,
A study by Burg and Hulbert (7:116) found little evidence of a
correlation between static and dynamic visual acuity.
The results of this research clearly indicates that a per­
son's ability to discriminate a moving target cannot be predicted
In­
adequately from. ?his static acuity, and that the adequacy of his
prediction decreases as the speed of the moving target increases,
Weissman and Freeburne (20 1145) reported the following from their
study;
A significant relationship at the ,01 level between the first
four speeds [20, 60, 90, and 120®/sec ,3 and static acuity were
found to exist, whereas at the two fastest speeds [150 and 180°/
s e c t h e relationship at this criterion level of significance ..
was not demonstrated.
In later research done by Burg (6;460), in which 17,500 subjects
ranging in age from 16=92 years were tested for both static visual
acuity and dynamic visual acuity, the following results were noted;
, ,(a) acuity declines progressively with both increasing
speed of target movement and advancing age, (b) males have
consistently better acuity (both static and dynamic) than
females, and (c) high intercorrelations exist between the
static and. dynamic tests, these correlations decreasing with
increasing speed of target movement.
DYNAMIC VISUAL ACUITY STUDIES
Moire recently, studies have been concerned with dynamic
visual acuity.
Miller and Ludvigh, as reported by Sanderson (18;158),
describe the dynamic visual acuity test in the following ways
The test of dynamic visual acuity consists of presenting
what has been defined as a ’unit velocity step stimulus,* The
test object suddenly appears, at time t*G, traveling at a constant
angular velocity. The CNS must estimate the direction and vel­
ocity of movement of the object, ■ It a)ust then send to the extra.=
ocular muscles innervation appropriate to place and hold the
image of the object in the vicinity of the fovea for a suffi-
15
ciently long period of time to permit the resolution of the
critical detail* It is the efficiency of this complex process
which is measured by the test of dynamic visual acuity*
Fergenson and Susansky (lO$343) reported further on the
work of Ludvigh and Miller*
The results of Ludvigh and Miller indicated that (a) DVA
deteriorates significantly and progressively.as the angular
velocity of the target increases, (b) BVA performance varies
little for a horizontal or vertical plane of movement,, (c)
DVA varies insignificantly between a subject moving with respect to the target and vice versa, •(d) DVA performance can
be improved by training or by increasing target illumination,
and (e) DVA and SVA are not significantly correlated*'
In the study by Cratty (8 ), dynamic visual acuity was ex­
plored in 4?5 children- ranging in age from five to twelve years*
A summary of the findings by Cratty were the following;
I )sign­
ificant age differences existed under all visual conditions; 2 )
there were significant differences between the two sexes with the
male showing superior results in both the dynamic visual test and
the static visual test; 3 ) there were no significant racial dif­
ferences recorded in the study; 4) children wearing glasses were
significantly inferior in. both the dynamic and static visual tests
to the children not wearing corrective lenses;
3) there were no
significant differences seen between children with left or light
eye preferences; and 6 ) only.minor differences were seen in scores
of children with different eye color, and then only at the faster
16
speeds.
The study by Burg and Hulbert (?) also found evidence that
male subjects consistently did better on dynamic visual acuity tests
than females.
In a study by Barmack (2:1377). the dynamic visual acuity of
man was compared to the dynamic visual acuity of monkeys.
He re­
ported the following!
The results of this experiment demonstrate that the DVA of
monkeys is superior to that of man, although the static visual
acuity of monkeys is inferior to that of man. Both monkeys and
man employ a stereotyped sequence of eye movements, consisting
of a combination of saccadic and smooth pursuit eye movements,
to fixate the moving acuity target,. The superiority of monkeys
in DVA is accounted for by the.shorter latencies and higher
velocities with which they execute saccadic and smooth pursuit
eye movements.
In the above quotation by Barmackf two basic eye movement
,patterns were suggested that respond to a moving stimuli— saccadic
and smooth pursuit eye movements.
Westheimer (21:939) added the
following information about the eye movement patterns.
Movements of the target across the retina or the illusion
of movement as produced by short bursts of retinal stimulation
in the temporal and spatial sequence of-a typical movement
stimulus, but separated by reasonably short time intervals,
induces a regular constant velocity movement in both eyes.
The velocity of this movement is generally, but by no means
always, closely related to the speed of the target, and with­
in a reasonable span of target velocities the eyes start
moving with the correct velocity after a'reaction time of
often less than 200 msec, . ,
During tracking, adjustments to errors are carried out
by discrete changes in the velocity-of the following movements
17
and by saccadic movements, A great deal of the adjustment of
errors due to an incorrect velocity of the constant velocity
following movements, as well as the adjustment of all position
errors, takes place by means of saccadic movements,
Abercrombie, as reported by Sanderson (18:17$), stated the following
about the development in children of the eye movements,
.The regularity of both pursuit and saccadic movements im­
proved in normal children between the ages of 6 and lit even
at that age they are not so good as those of men of 18, so
attainment of precision in eye movements takes some time to
develop.
In a study by Fergenson and Susansky (IG)e dynamic visual
acuity was evaluated by two specific variables— target angular
velocity and target exposure time.
It was the intent of their in­
vestigation to see whether an increased target angular velocity or
a decreased target exposure time resulted in a deterioration of
dynamic visual acuity.
The. conclusions Fergenson and Suzansky (10:
3$l) reached regarding their research are the following:
In agreement with previous DVA research the present study
has again demonstrated that DVA deteriorates as w [!target angu­
lar velocity} increases. The deterioration was.approximately
linear for the range of w studied, , ,The analysis of variance
indicated that the small changes in w of this experiment still
resulted in significant DVA changes,
DVA also deteriorated as te [target exposure timSJ de­
creased, supporting the hypothesis that t% is an important
determinant of DVA scores. This deterioration was an in­
creasing nonlinear function for decreased te , , ,The hypo­
thesis was further supported'by the analysis of variance, which demonstrated-a higher significance for the effects of te
changes than for w changes.
18
Discussions with the subjects after testing hinted that the
variation of DVA with changes of te may be related to changes
of the viewing technique that accompanied changes of te» Most
of the subjects reported that they could do best by tracking
the target with head movement during the longer exposure times.
. , ,but that during the shorter exposure times. , ,they used
a blinking technique of short, rapid eye jerks in an attempt
to 'stop' the target.
Fergenson and Suzansky (10) further stated that dynamic
visual acuity was related to the effectiveness of the entire oculo­
motor system.
They identified the following important abilities
as necessary to the effectiveness of the oculomotor system: l)
head movement and eye movement, in tracking, 2) judiciously timed
blinking, and 3) the resolving abilities of the eye.
In the study,
by Barmack (2), three main factors were proposed that determine
dynamic visual acuity— foveal acuity, oculomotor control, and para­
foveal acuity.
As reported by Sanderson (l8il60), Miller and
Ludvigh concluded that;
, . .a normal individual’s dynamic visual acuity is dependent
chiefly upon the efficiency of the entire oculomotor pursuit
mechanism rather than upon the .functioning of the individual
muscles.
DYNAMIC VISUAL ACUITY AND ITS RELATIONSHIP
TO SPORTS PERFORMANCE
Researchers are -now beginning to :see. a relationship' between
dynamic visual acuity and ball skills performance, but there is ,some
19
discussion among the researchers about just what that relationship
is,
Sanderson (I81I 56) reported the following:
The fact that, in fast ball 'games, the-performance is de­
pendent upon the visual system for providing him with cues
concerning, the constantly changing stimulus situation, en­
courages the view that there is an important link between some
aspect or aspects of visual efficiency and games performancee
Much effort has been given to the attempt to isolate such
visual parameters as are related to games ability, but there
has been little agreement amongst'investigators as to the
precise nature of particular relationships,
Sanderson (18 1176-77) continued on to say the following:
If accurate perception of ball flight characteristics depends
partly upon oculomotor co-ordination and- the DVA test represents
a measure of this ability, a positive relationship'may well
emerge between ball'games ability and- dynamic vision. The test,
used with school children8 may be sensitive to those cases of
partial paralyses of the-■extraocular muscles and other oculo­
motor co-ordination defects which would normally have gone
unnoticed— and consequently delineate tangible reasons for in­
ability to acquire ball skill. If the test can facilitate such
diagnosis it may have prognostic implications in that the test
score could be used as a predictor of ball games ability,
. Graybiel and others (13) reported on.a study by Krestovinikov
in which he found that visual acuity was improved in a large percen­
tage of athletes immediately after exercise,
Whiting and Sanderson
(22) also reported that they found an increase in visual acuity
after exercise.
They suggested that exercise may lead to an in­
creased arousal level and to greater receptor- sensitivity, which
leads to the increase in -visual acuity.
20
Eubbard and Seng (l4) did a study to determine the visual
basis for tracking a pitched ball in terras of head and eye move­
ments e
Conclusions they (14:56) reached were the following:
I 0 Watching the ball cross the plate without swinging often
involved tracking movements of the head; the head was turned"
either with the passage of the ball, or subsequent to it, or
not at all,
2, Visual tracking when a swing occured was accomplished
with the head essentially fixated and the eyes moyinge Pursuit
movements of the eyes seemed to provide the primary basis for
' tracking. Convergence and compensatory^ movements.were also
found, but no evidence of saccadic jerks, was found,
3« The ball was not touched with eye movements clear up to
bat contact,. , ,Under special circumstances tracking to contact
may be possible, Howeyer, ,parameters.in vision and ball-movement
suggest strongly that reports of ability to track to contact are
based on an illusion resulting from perceptual integration of
diverse sensory stimuli*
Sanderson and Whiting (19:93*94) found evidence of a slight
correlation between dynamic visual acuity and catching performance,
"However at best there is only 23% common variance between DVA and
catching, a fact which encourages caution and emphasises the need
for confirmatory investigation,"
In a study by Beals (3:589),
basketball shooting accuracy was found to be significantly depen­
dent upon dynamic visual acuity.
The ability of a basketball player-to shoot baskets from
the field is highly dependent upon his DVA and the computerised
techniques of principal-component analysis and multiple re­
gression analysis can quickly and economically develop the
functional relationship between characteristics of vision.
The resulting models can then be used to predict athletic
performance with extreme reliability.
21
A study by Morris and Kreighbaum (l?) concurred with the
results found by Beals0
Morris and Kreighbaum (17:483) reported
the following:
• . .dynamic visual acuity may have a positive effect on
basketball playing ability, and, further, on the ability
to coincide with a moving object, and that such acuity is
an asset beyond good shooting mechanics. Training for
• enhanced dynamic visual acuity might be included in con­
ditioning programs for athletes participating in activities
where they must coincide with moving objects.
O
' - SUMMARY
In summary several important points about visual per­
ception should be reviewede
First of all, the development of
visual perception begins at birth and continues to develop until
adulthood.
Young children need to be exposed to many different
visual stimuli in order for their visual development to progress
to its fullest capabilities.
One aspect of visual.perception that
can be investigated is dynamic visual acuity*
.\ -
Dynamic visual acuity
.
is the ability of an observer to detect the detail of a moving ob­
ject,
There is an increased interest in this area of visual per­
ception because of the many activities that involve discrimination
of moving objects.
Researchers are now beginning to show that a
relationship exists between dynamic visual■acuity and ball skills ■
performance even though the researchers have not come to a conclu­
22
sion about what that relationship is.
When considering the possible
relationship that might exist, one should consider what the possible
meaning to physical education might be,
Bogard (5*^7) sta.de the
following statement in that regard:
, . ,those who are interested in physical education programs
for perceptual-motor development might give more consideration
and emphasis to activities which'require visual perception of
moving objects rather than static, objects. If one of the ob­
jectives .of such a program is to aid development of ability
to cope with the world, more consideration should, be given to
movement which must be perceived before responses can be made,
As
is suggested by several investigators, an integral part of every
physical education program might need to include a training program
for the enhancement of dynamic visual acuity.
Chapter 3
METHODS AND PROCEDURES
JUSTIFICATION OF THE DESIGN
The basic purposes of the study were;
I) to compare the
dynamic visual acuity status among the different grades of the stu­
dents tested, 2) to compare the dynamic visual acuity status between
students who had different eye ..preferences, and 3) to compare the
dynamic visual acuity status between males and females,.
The dynamic visual acuity status was measured at three dif­
ferent speeds— 60° per second, 90° per second, and 120° per seconde
The three speeds were chosen on the basis of information gathered
from previous, studies done on dynamic visual acuity0
The design of
the study was similar to the one. used in Cratty1s (8) study*
Through
test-retest comparisons, Cratty found this test to be reliable»
After consultations with Dra Suvak2 , the.investigator deter­
mined the results by computation of analysis of variance*
By using
the computations of analysis of variance, the investigator was able
to determine the relationship between the different variables of
the test*
_________
r—
.
....
;
'2Dr0 Albert Suvak, Testing and Counseling Department, Montana
State University*
24
HYPOTHESES' FOR THE STUDY
The three null hypotheses relevant to the study were the
followingj
Hypothesis One.
There will be no significant difference in ■
the dynamic visual acuity status among the different grade levels
of the students.
There will be no significant difference in
the dynamic visual acuity status between children who have a left or
right eye preference.
Hypothesis Three. . There will be no significant difference in
the dynamic visual acuity status between males -and. f emales.
SAMPLE FOR THE STUDY
Students enrolled at Irving Elementary School in Bozeman,
Montana, provided the sample for the study.
The sample tested in­
cluded 46 first grade students, 4? second grade students, 46 third
grade students, and 43 fourth grade students.
The following reasons were the basis for the selection of
these students as the samplei
I.
The teachers and the principal of the school were willing
to co-operate in the study.
.
25
2, The school was easily, accessible to the investigator*
3« The students were available to the investigator at the
alloted scheduled time to conduct the research*
4» The Irving School population was representative of the
Bozeman elementary school population*
EQUIPMENT'USED IN THE STUDY
The equipment that was used in the study included the
followingt
l) a 35 mm slide projector-equipped0With a six inch zoom
lens, 2) a 180° white cylindrical screen, 3) an oeulo-rot'ator, and
4) two sets of Bausch and Lomb Master Crtho-Bater target slides*
The
equipment was similar to the equipment used in Morris and Kreigbaum's
(l?) study and also was proposed by Anderson (l)»
The investigator
of the study spent several preliminary hours working with the equip­
ment (specifically, the oculo-rotator) to become acquainted and to
become familiar with its operation*
The equipment was operated in the following Wayt
the 35 mm
slide projector rested above the mid-point on the top of the 18-0°
white cylindrical screen*
A target slide was projected to a rotating
mirror which was behind and above each subject’s head*
The mirror
allowed the Image of the target slide to be projected back onto the
screen in front of each subject.
The mirror rotated the target slide
26
from left to right through the full 180° field of the cylindrical
screen.
Through manipulation of the oculo-rotator, the three differ­
ent speeds of the mirror were accomplished.
The two sets of slides employed in the test were target
slides modified to fit the slide projector,
(See Appendix A,)
The
sets of slides consisted of targets whose checkerboard design was
randomly positioned in one of four positions:
up, down, left, right.
Each subject was instructed to indicate the position of the checker­
board as the slide was projected on the 180° screen.
of slides was shown at an angular velocity Of
The first set
60° per second.
In the
second part of the test, the second set-of slides was presented at an
angular velocity of 90° per second.
The first set of slides was used
for the third part of the test.at an angular velocity of 120° per
second.
TESTING PROCEDURE AND DATA COLLECTION
Each subject was individually
acuity.
tested for dynamic visual
Background information including the subject’s name, grade
in school, sex, and eye preference was obtained for each subject,
preference was checked for each student by asking him or her to
sight one eye into a hollow tube which was.placed directly in front
of the student at eye level.
The eye that was used for sighting was
27
noted as the preferred eye.
When the testing procedure began, the subject was seated on
a chair which was four feet in front of the cylindrical screen,
A
general orientation of the testing procedure was given to each student,
so that the individual understood the followingt I) what the target
slides looked like, 2) that the slides would move from left to right
across the screen
at each of the three previously mentioned speeds,
and 3) that the job of the subject being tested was to try to identify
either verbally or by hand indication where the
each target slide.
checkerboard was on
The subject was allowed to freely move his or her.
head from left to right to help in tracking the slides.
The first set of slides was presented at an angular.velocity
of 60° per second, with each succeeding slide getting progressively
smaller.
vals,
Each slide was presented to the subject at ten second inter­
The subject was verbally cued one second before each slide was
visible on the screen.
After the subject incorrectly identified
two consecutive slides, the first part of the testing procedure was
concluded.
After a one minute rest interval, the second part of the test
began.
In this part, the second set of slides was presented at an
angular, velocity of 90° per second.
Each slide was again presented
to the subject at ten second intervals, and the subject was verbally
28
cued one second before each slide was visible on the screen.
After
two consecutive misses, the second part of the test was completed.
After a one minute rest period, the final part of the test
began.
The first set of slides ^was used in this part of the test at
an angular velocity of 120° per second.
The testing procedure was
the same as for the.two previous other parts.
All data oertinent to the- study were collected on the dynamic
*
/
visual acuity score sheets.
(See Appendix B ,)
A table (see Appendix
C) was used in translating the number of slides correctly identified
to the target size (which is expressed in minutes of arc).
SCHEDULE OF DATA COLLECTION
_ .
The data for the study-were collected according, to the fol~ ■
lowing time tablei
I) the data collection for. the fourth grade was
completed by December 17, 1976; 2) the second grade data collection
was completed by January 31, 1977; 3) February 28, 1977 was the final
date for completing the data collection for the third grade; and 4)
the data collection, for the first grade was completed by March 18,
1977.
ANALYSIS OF DATA
The collected data were tabulated, and the. Sigma 7 computer ■'
at Montana State University was used for making statistical computa­
29
tions,
The data .were analyzed through the use of analysis of variance,
In .grade comparisons, the mean differences for each grade
under"each of the visual conditions were inspected.
Similar com- •
parisons were made for the differences in eye preference and the
difference between male and females.
In the following chapter, a
complete analysis and discussion of the.results of the data.can be
found,
Chapter 4
RESULTS
M D DISCUSSION OF DATA
Data on the dynamic visual acuity status of students in
grades one through four were collected during the fall and winter
quarters of 1976-77o
The number of students tested was 182«
This
chapter includes a presentation of the results of the data,and a
discussion of the results,
PRESENTATION.OF THE RESULTS
By the use of analysis of variance„ a .comparison of the
dynamic visual acuity status among three different variables was
considered.
The three variables were identified as the following?
grade differences, sex differences, and eye preference differences.
Each variable was considered individually, and then the interaction
effect of two variables was considered.
Results Contrasting Grade Differences
and DVA Test
Students were categorized into four different grade levels,
for the study.
This categorization was identified as the current
grade level for the individual students.
The number of students
tested included 46 first grade students, 4? seepzid grade students,
46 third grade students, and 43 fourth grade students.
31
The results of>the grade comparisons are found in Table I
and Table 2„
Table I consists of the least-squares mean for each
grade at each speed of the teste
Also, total mean scores are given
for each grade and for each speed of the test.
The lower the score,
the better the students performed on the dynamic visual acuity test*
For example, a fourth grade least-squares mean score of 1*0$ (60°
per second) was a better dynamic visual acuity score than a first
grade least-squares mean score of 1623 (60° per second).
Table I
„
Least-Squares Mean for Grade Levels
and DVA Test '
DVA Test
120°/sec,
(min. of arc) (min. of arc) (min. of arc)
60°/sec,
90°/see.
I
1.23
2,02
3.71
2.32
2
1.09
1.73
3.86 .
2.23
3
1.09
1.61
2.79
1.83
4
1,05
1.41
2.29
X
1.11
1.69
■ 3.16
Grade
X
(min. of arc)**
.
1,#
■^Assumed throughout all Tables
In Table 2, an analysis of variance is presented, contrasting
the grade differences and the dynamic visual acuity test. The analysis
32
of variance yielded an F ratio of 8,312 for grade differences.
ratio of 3o80 was needed for a significance at the ,01 level.
An F
The F
ratio indicated that there was a significant difference among the
four grades on their performance on the dynamic visual acuity.test.
By referring to Table I, one can see that the higher the grade, the
better the performance on the dynamic visual acuity test.
Table 2
Analysis of Variance, Contrasting Grade Differences
and DVA Test
SOURCE
D 0F,
SUM'OF SQ,
MEAH SQ•
Grade
3
474505,375000
158168.125000
8.312*
Test
2
4056377.OOOOOO
2028188,000000
106.590*
Grade X Test
6
375041.312500
62506,882812
3.285*
10160877.000000
19027,859375
Remainder
534-
.
• F RATIO
^Significant at p <,01 level
Table 2 shows that there was a significant interaction effect
between the different grades and the dynamic visual acuity test.
F ratio was 3*285, which was significant at the ,01 level.
ratio of 2,82. was needed for a ,01 level of significance,
The
An F
in looking
at the least-squares mean (Table l), one can see that grade level
33
was fairly indicative of performance on the dynamic visual acuity
test, but it did not hold true in all cases.
Grade four students
had the best score at all three speeds of the test, while grade.one
students had the lowest score on the two slowest speeds of the test
(60° and 90° per second).
Grade one students did score better than
grade, two students on the fastest speed (120° per second) of the
test.
Results Contrasting Eye Preference
Differences and DVA Test
Por a comparison to the dynamic visual acuity test the second
variable that was identified was eye preference.
Seventy students
had a left eye preference and 112 students had a right eye prefer­
ence,
The results of the comparison in using this variable are
found in Table 3 and Table 4,
Table 3
Least-Squares Mean for Eye Preference
and DVA Test
Eye
Preference
60°/sec,
BVA Test
90°/seco
120°/sec.
Left
1.13
1.76
Right
1.11
1.66
1.12
1.71
X
3.24
.
x .
2.04
1.97
3,19
34
According to the results found in Table 3» children with
a.right eye preference scored better, on the dynamic visual acuity
test than children with a left eye preference#
The analysis of variance (Table 4) yielded an F ratio of
o330 which meant that no significant difference was found in the
dynamic visual acuity status between.children who had a left or
right eye preference.
An F ratio of ,041, which was not signi-i
fleant, was found.for the interaction effect between eye prefer­
ence and the dynamic visual acuity test thus one can say. that
eye preference does not determine how a person will perform on
the dynamic visual acuity test#
Table 4
Analysis of Variance, Contrasting Left and Right
Eye- Preference and DVA Test.
SOURCE
D 0F o
SUM OF. SQ0
■MEAN SQ. .
F RATIO
Eye
I
6729»277344
6729.277344
.330
Test
2
3933661,000000
/ 1966830«000000
96,536
Eye X Test
2
1650,691406
825.345703
,041
540
11002039,000000
20374*144531
Remainder
^Significant at p 4.« 01 level
35
Results. Contrasting Sex Differences
and DVA Test
The third variable identified was sex differences®
One
hundred one. males and 81 females were tested for dynamic visual
acuitye
The results of the data are found in Table 5 and Table 6«
In looking at the least-squares mean scores in Table 5» one
can see that the males in the study were more efficient on the dy­
namic visual acuity test than the females®
Furthermore,, the males
were consistently more efficient than the females on sJl three
speeds of the test.
Table 5
Least-Squares Mean for Male and Female Subjects
and DVA Test
DVA Test
Sex
60°/sec,
9O0/sec,
120°/sec.
X
Male
1.08
1*59
2.8?
1.85
Female
lel6
1.83
3.5?
2.19
1.12
1.71
3.22
X
According to the F ratio of 7,68? shown in Table 6, there
was a significant difference between male and female scores on the
dynamic visual acuity test.
.01 level.
The difference was significant at the
No significance (F ratio=#,322) was noted in the
36
interaction effects between sex differences and the dynamic visual
acuity testo
This means that males consistently scored better on
the dynamic visual acuity test throughout all three speeds of the
test.
Table 6
Analysis of Variance, Contrasting Male and Female
Subjects and BVA Test
D6F e
SOURCE
SUM OF SQe
MEAN SQ.
i 53235.75OO.OO -
Sex
I
I53235.75OOOO
Test.
2
4217101.000000
2108550 00000.00
Sex X Test
2
92591.062500
46295.531250
540
10764593.000000
. 19934.429687
Remainder
F RATIO
7.687*
105.774*
2.322
^Significant at p <.01 level
Results Contrasting.Grade Differences
and Eye Preference Differences
In Table 7 and Table 8, a presentation of the results of
the interaction effects of two variables is given.
The two dif­
ferent variables were identified as grade differences and eye
preference differences.
As was established;earlier in the chapter, a-significant
difference between grade levels was found to exist on the dynamic
37
visual acuity test, and no significant difference between eye pre­
ference was found*
For example, according to the results in Table 7,,
students in grade one with a right eye preference scored better than
the students with a left eye preference} but in grade two, students
with a left eye preference scored better than the ones with a right
eye preference*
Table 7
Least-Squares Mean for Grade Levels
and Eye Preferences
Eye
Preference
I
2
■Grade
3
'
4
Left
2.54
1.97
1.80
1.73
Right
2.12
2.32
1.86
'1.51:
2,33
2.14
1.83
1.62
X
.
X
2.01 .
1.95
When looking at the Interaction effects of the .two variables
(Table 8), no significant difference (F ratio=l*125) was established
between grade level and eye preference; therefore, one can say that
eye preference.does not determine.in any of the grades how well that
grade will perform on the dynamic visual acuity test.
38
Table 8
Analysis of Variance, Contrasting Grade Differences
and Left and Right Eye Preference
SOURCE
D 0F e
SUM OF SQe
MEAN SQ„
F RATIO
4 .156*
Grade
3
127366.750000
42455.582031
Eye
I
1328.576172
1328.576172
.130
Grade X Eye
3
34468.046875
11489.347656
1.125
174
I7775O7.0G0000
10215.554667
Remainder
^Significant at p <„01 level
•Hesults Contrasting Sex Differences
• and Grade Differences
The next two variables were sex differences and grade level
differences.
The results are found in Table 9 and Table 10.
Table 9
Least-Squares Mean for Grade Levels
and 'Male and Female Subjects,.
Sex
I
2
....
Grade
3
...
4
X
Male
2.36
1.89
1.63
1.43
1.83
Female
2.26
2,76
2.01
1.77
2.20
2.31
2.32
1.82
'1.60
X
.
39
According to the results, seen in Table 9» males scored
-'I"
consistently better on. the dynamic visual acuity test than females.
At the first grade level the females did score better than the
males.
According to the results in Table 10, there was no signi«=
ficance in the interaction effects between sex and grade level (P
ratio=1.772)$ therefore, one can say that the sex of the child does
not determine how well that grade will perform on the dynamic visual
acuity test.
Table 10
Analysis of Variance, Contrasting Grade Differences
and Male and Female Subjects
SOURCE
B.F.
SUM OF SQ.
MEAH SQ.
F RATIO
Grade
3
172131e875000
57377.289062
5.870*
Sex
I
61648.496094
61648.496094
6,307*
Grade X Sex
3
51972.628906
17324.207031
1.772
174
1700762.000000
•9774.492187
Remainder
■^Significant at p <.01 level
Results Contrasting Sex Differences
and Eye Preference Differences
The final two variables that were compared- in the study were
male and female subjects and left and right eye preferences. .Table
40
11 and Table 12 show the results of the data®
:
;
.
. In Table 11, one can see that the males did better on the
dynamic visual acuity test, regardless of their eye preference®
Table 11
Least-Squares Mean for Male and Female Subjects;;
and Left and Right Eye Preferences
Left
Eye Preference
___ Right
Male
1,86
1.84
1.85
Female
2,27
2.13
2,20
2® 06
1.98
Sex
X
X
According to the results seen in Table; 12, there was no
significant difference (F ratio”=!»58) in- the interaction effects of
the two variables of sex differences and eye preference differences;
therefore, one can say that eye preference did not determine how
well male or female subjects would perform on the dynamic visual
acuity test*
41
Table 12
/
'
•
Analysis of Variance, Contrasting Male and Female Subjects
and Left and Right Eye Preference
.
SOURCE
DoF.
SUM OF SQo
MEAJW SQ.
F RATIO
Eye
I
2756.664063
2756.664063
,256
Sex
I
52782*054687
52782,05468?
4.901*
Eye X Sex
I
1704,941895
1704.941895
Remainder
178
1917041.000000
10769.890625
.158
■“•Significant a.t p <«,01 level
Results Related to Hypotheses
On the basis of the results of the present study, the fol­
lowing three.hypotheses were either accepted or rejected.
Hypothesis One:
there will,be nonsignificant difference in
the dynamic visual acuity status among the different grade levels
of the students®
The hypothesis was rejected on the basis of the
obtained significant F score (P ratic=8 ®312) for the variable of
grade differences on the dynamic visual acuity test®
Hypothesis Twos
there will be no significant difference in
the dynamic visual acuity status between children who M v e a left or
right eye preference.
The hypothesis was accepted on' the basis.of
42
the obtained non-significant F score (F ratio=.330) for the variable
of eye preference differences on the dynamic visual acuity test*
Hypothesis Threet
thgre will be no significant difference
in the dynamic visual acuity status between males and females*
The
hypothesis was rejected on the basis of the obtained significant F
score (F ratio=?*68?) for the variable of. sex differences on the
dynamic visual acuity test,
DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS
The. results of the present study.supported previous dynamic
visual acuity research in which dynamic visual acuity was shown to
deteriorate as the angular velocity of the target increases*
The
previous studies done in the area include ones by Ludvigh and Miller*
as reported by Fergenson-and Suzansky (10), and the one by Fergenson
and Suzansky (10),
Since there was a significant difference among the grade
levels on the dynamic visual acuity test, the study supported earlier
findings by Cratty (9),. In Cratty's study age differences were found
to exist, while in the present study grade level differences were
found to exist*
In both studies the older children performed better
on the dynamic visual acuity test, especially at the faster speeds,
supporting the theory that dynamic visual acuity is developmental*
43
In Cratty's (9) study, plateaus of performance on the dynamic
visual acuity test seemed to exist at different age levels*
example, an initial level of performance was ,seen at
For
the ages of
five and six years, while a second level of performance was seen in
the scores of children at the age of seven through nine years*
In
the.present study.the scores between first and second grade students
were similar, while greater differences were seen In scores between .
second and third graders and third and fourth graders.
The study also supported Williams's (23) reporting of the
age at which children can pursue objects moving horizontally*
Williams (23) stated that eight-= and nine-year-olds are more capa­
ble in their visual pursuit movements than seven-year-olds*
Further­
more, the study would seem to support Abercrombie's position, as
reported by Sanderson (18), that the two eye movements that respond
to a moving stimuli (pursuit and saccadic) improve in normal children
between the ages of six and eleven*
The present study also supported earlier findings by Cratty
(9) and Burg/Hulbert (?) in which male subjects consistently perform­
ed better on dynamic visual acuity tests than females*
One interest-
/
Ing observation from this study was the fact that at the first grade
level the females scored higher on the dynamic visual acuity test,
while at all the other grade levels the males scored higher*
The
44
possible reason for this could he the difference in the activities
of the males and"females after starting school.
The study also supported Cratty's (9 ) findings that no
significant difference could he seen between subjects who had a
left or right eye preference.
Furthermore, the study concurred with Gratty's (9 ) findings
on the interaction effects of two variables.
In Cratty's study no
significance of interaction effects between sex differences and age
differences was seen, while in the present study no significance
of interaction effects between sex differences and grade level.dif­
ferences was seen.
Chapter 5
sm-mrar,
conclusions, and recommewdations
SOMMART
The study was conducted t o .determine the dynamic visual acuity
status of 182 elementary age students.
Each student was individually
tested by identifying where a distinct portion (checkerboard design)
was on a moving target slide.
The target slides were presented on
a 180° cylindrical screen. .By the use of an oculo-rotator, the target
slides were moved at three predetermined speeds (60° per second, 90°
per second, and 120° per second) across-the screen.
Bach portion of
the test consisted of target slides moving at -one of the three pre­
viously mentioned speeds.
Also, each, slide got .progressively
smaller in each portion of the. test.
When a subject incorrectly
identified the placement of the checkerboard design in two consecu­
tive slides, a portion of the test was completed. •The number of
correct responses was translated to the target size (which was ex­
pressed in minutes of arc)..
A comparison of the dynamic visual acuity status among three
different variables was considered— grade differences, sex differences,
and eye preference differences.
Each variable was considered indivi­
dually, and the interaction effects of two variables was also con­
sidered,
By the use of analysis of variance, the investigator made
the following' conclusions from the study.
46
CONCLUSIONS
..
.
^ -v
I, A significant difference among the different grade levels
(grades one -through four) and the dynamic visual acuity test was found
to existe
The difference in the performance on the test seemed to be>
developmental in nature, as the students in the upper grades performed
better on the test than the students in the lower grades,
2»' No significant difference was seen on the dynamic visual
acuity test when/the scores of children with a left eye preference
were compared to the scores of children with a right eye preference, 3, -Male and female subjects scored significantly different
on the dynamic visual acuity test with the.males scoring consistently
better on all parts of the test,
)
4 0 There were no interaction.effects between grade level
differences.and eye preference differences noted in the.study,
5,
No interaction effects between grade level differences
and sex differences were noted,
6» Also, no interaction effects between sex differences and
eye preference differences were seen,
•
•
•■
RECOMMENDATIONS
In view of .the findings of the study, the following recom­
mendations have been.made by the investigator for further research
47
in the area of dynamic, visual acuity.
I. Investigations similar to the present study need to be .
made using a wider age or grade range of subjects to substantiate
where the developmental plateaus of dynamic visual acuity seem to
be in the elementary age child.
Z0 Studies need to be made in, "the area of sex ,,differences to
determine the reason or reasons why males perform better than fe­
males on the dynamic visual acuity test,
3o Follow-up investigations need to be made comparing the
dynamic visual acuity status of children and academic abilities such
as I eQe tests and reading ability tests.
4 0 Follow-up investigations need to be made comparing the
dynamic visual acuity status of children and specific motor skill
abilities that involve movement, e.g. striking ability and catching
ability,
5. A study needs to be undertaken to see if physical exercise
immediately proceeding a dynamic visual acuity test will have an
effect on the results of the test.
6. A follow-up investigation should be considered in the area,
of eye preference to see if subjects with a right hand/right eye
preference or left hand/left eye preference differ on the dynamic
visual acuity test as compared to subjects with a cross-dominance,
such as right hand/left eye preference or left hand/right eye
Preference6
7 o Finally, a longitudinal study needs to be done to see
when and why, if possible, improvements in dynamic visual acuity
come about in individual Children6
■SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ie
Anderson, Pe D 0, and others, "An Apparatus for Measuring Dynamic
Visual Acuity," Test Engineering, August 1970, ppe 18-19,
2,
Barmack,'-N. H, "Dynamic Visual Acuity as an Index of EJye Move­
ment Control," Vision Research, 10:1377-91« 1970«
3e
Beal, R, P,,. and others. "The .Relationship'Between Basketball
Shooting Performance and Certain Visual Attributes," American
Journal of Optometry, 48:585-90, 1971« .
4.
Begbie, G, ■Hugh. Seeing and the Eye :,An Introduction to Vision,
Garden City, New York: The Natural History Press, 1969«
5«
Bogard, Dolores Ann. "Visual Perception of Static and Dynamic
Two-Dimensional Objects: A Cross-Sectional Study," Doctoral dis­
sertation, University of Southern California,.1971«
6«
Burg, Albert, "Visual Acuity as Measured by Dynamic and Static
Tests: A Comparative Evaluation," Journal 'Cf. Applied -Psychology,
50:460-66, 1966«
7.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ and Slade Hulbert, "Dynamic Visual Acuity as Related to ■
Age, Sex, and Static Acuity," Journal of'Applied Psychology,
45:111-16, 1961.
8,
Cratty, Bryant Je Dynamic Visual Acuity:■ A Developmental Study,
Monograph, UCLA, 1973«
9«
_____ . "Visual Perceptual Development," Perceptual and Motor
Development in Infants and Children,- New York: 'The MacMillan
Compary, 1970, pp. 67-99.
10«. Fergenson, P. E0 and J. W. Suzansky. "An Investigation of Dynamic
and Static Visual Acuity," Perception, 2 s'343-356,"■ 1973«
11«
Gesell, Arnold, Vision— Its Development in Infant and Child,
New York: Paul B. Hoeber, Inc., 1949,
12.
Gibson, James J. The Perception of the Visual World, Cambridge,
Massachusetts: The Riverside Press, 1950.
13«
Graybiel, Ashton,.and others. "Russian Studies of Vision in
Relation to Physical Activity and Sports," Research Quarterly,
26:480-85, 1955«
51
14»
Hubbard, Alfred W 0 and Charles N 0 Seng0,, "Visual Movements of
Batters," Research Quarterly. 25«42-57,- 1954» .
15o
Kidd, Aline H 0 and Jeanne L 0 Rivoire, eds. Perceptual Develop­
ment in Children. New York* International Universities Press,
Inc0, 1966,
l60 Larson, Charlotte E 0 "Perceptual Development in Young Children,"
Association for the Study of Perception, 3«11* 1968,
I?o
Morris, G 0 S0 Don and Ellen Kreighbaum0 "Dynamic Visual Acuity
of Varsity Women Volleyball and Basketball Players," Research
Quarterly. 48«480-83, 1977»
18,
Sanderson, F 0 H0 "Perceptual Studies« Visual Acuity and Sport­
ing Performance."' Readings in Sports Psychology. ed0 H 0 T 0 A 0
Whiting, London* Henry Kimpton -Publishers,, 1972, pp„ 156-82.
19 o
.
and. He T 0--A6 Whiting0 vDynamic Visual Acuity and Per­
formance in a Catching Task,". Journal of Motor Behavior, 6*87-94,
1974»
20o
Weissman, Seymour and C 0 M 0 Freeburae0 "Relationship Between .
Static and Dynamic Visual Acuity," Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 70:141-46, 1965*
21,
Westheimer6 Gerald, "Eye Movement Responses to a Horizontally
Moving Visual Stimulus." AMA,! Archives ..of Opthalmology,
52*932-41, 1954c
220
Whiting, H 0 T 0 A. and F 0 H 0 Sanderson, “The Effect of Exercise
on the Visual and Auditory Acuity of Table-Tennis Players,"
Journal of Motor Behavior. 4 *163-69, 1972,
23,
Williams, Harriet G 0 “Visual Perception Characteristics of
Perceptual-Motor Development," A Textbook of Motor. Development,
ed, Charles B 0 Corbin, Dubuque, Iowa* Wm0 C 0 Brown Compauny,
1973, pp.122-29.
APPENDIXES
APPENDIX A
Figure I
Target Slide
APPENDIX B
Figure 2
DVA Score Sheet
Age
Name
RPM
I
h "
Eye Color
Eye Preference
Grade■
...
Date
Static Acuity Score
RPM
RPM
R
D
D .
L
D
U
D
R
k
U
L
D
U I
■ h
R I
U I
~T~~r—
"i H T T
- n ...... ' ................ L
D
u I
U I
L
D
R
n r i
R T T
D I
I R I
D
L
D
D
R
L
R
M
•
RPM
R
D
L
D
D
R
D
U
R1
U
D
U
U
R
i,
h
U
U
Ii
I
D
RPM '
-
‘
.
....
_
a I
■L
D
L
ft
b
R .________________
I„
L
‘R
I R
I L ■
I L
I' U
I u.
I D ■
I L
RPM
:
_______ ______
2
! R
D
U
R
U
D
U
U
. D
L ''
D
L
R
a
I R
.
APPENDIX C
Table 13
Visual Acuity Equivalents of Visual Angles,
expressed in minutes of arc,
and Snellen Ratings
Visual Angle
(Minutes of arc)
’
'
■
Slides Piresented
1-15
Snellen Rating
""
•
10.0
1
2/200
5«o
2
20/100
3.33
3
20/ 6?
2.5
4
20/50
2.0
5 .
20/40
1.6?
6_
20/33
1.43
7
20/69
1.25 =
8
20/25
9 ‘
20/22
1.11
.
10
20/20
.91
11
20/18
.83
12
. 20/17
.77
13
. 20/15
.71
14:
20/14
.67
15; ■
20/13
1.0
APPENDIX D
Table 14
Raw Data
Student
Identlf!cation
101
102
103
104
105
106
10?
.. 108
109
no
111
112;
113'
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
Grade
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
. I
I
I
I
I
I
I
■ Eye
Preference
Sex
Left
Right
Right
Left
Left
Right
Right
Left
Right
Left
Right
Left
Left
Left
Left
Right
Left
Right
Right
Left
Right
Right
Right
Right
Male
Male
Male.
Female
Male
Female
Male
Male
Female
Male
Male
Female
Female
'Male
'Male
Male
Female
Female
Female
Male
Male
Male
Male
Female
DVA scores
9O0Zsec6
12O0Zsec.
60°/sec«
2.00
1.25
1 .6?
2.50
3.33
2.50
.77
.83 ..
i.ii
2.50
.91
1.67
.83
1,43
3.33
2.00
.83
3.33
. .91
1.25
1,11
1.25
3.33
3.33
3.33
2.00
1.25
3.33
1.25
1.67
1,25.
.91
"
■
.77
. .83
2.OQ
1.6?
2.50.83
.Tl
1.25
.83
' .91
.91
.77 .
2.00
.83
.91
l.ll
1.25
1.67
1.67
1.11
3.33
3.33
1.67.
2.50
3.33
2.50
10.00
lo.oo :
2,00
2.50
2.50
2.50
3.33
2.00
2.50
3.33
3.33
2.00
Average
1.91
1.78
1.69
1.46
1.13
1.86
2.88
1.69
1 .2?
. 1.46
1.80
2.61
5.00
5.2?
1.61
1,48
2.36
1.52
1.97
1.34
1.50
2.33
1.94
1.34
Table 15 (continued)
Student
Identification
Grade
Bye
Preference
Sex
I
I
I
I ■
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ■
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Left
Right
Left
Right
Right
Left
Right
Left.Right
Right
Left
Right
Left
Right
Right
Left
Left
Left
Left
Right
Right
Right
Female
Male
Female
Female
Female
Female,
Male '
Female
Male
Male
Female
Male
Male
Female
Female
Female
Male
Male
Male
Male
Female
Male
201
202
2
203
204
205
2
2
2 .
2
Left '
Left
Right
Right
Right
Left
Male
Male
'Male
Female
Male
Male ,
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
133
136
137
138
139
. 140
141
142
- 143
144
145
146
206
2
DVA scores
90°/sec9
IZO1
V s e c tt
60o/sec.
.77
.91
1.43
.91
1.67
2.50
.83
.77
1.25
.83
.77
.83
2.50
.83
1.25
1.00
.91
.83
3.33
1.43
2.50
1.43
1,11
1.43
2.00
.83
1.25
2.00
2.50
1.43
■
2.00
1.43
1.43
i.ii
3.33
.83
1.00
2.00
3.33
2.50
3.33
3.33
1.84
1.44
2.50
1.25
2.00
2.00
.95
1.91
1.42
1.18
1.58
1.67
2.50
1.43
2.50
2,00
2.00
2.00
2.50
1.43
3.33
2.50
. 10.00
1.67
5.00
2.50
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
5.00
2.50
.
5.00
3.33
5.00
1.43.
■ .91
1.43
.91
3.33
1.43
1.11
2,50
Average
2.50
2.50
2.50
10.00
2.50
3.33
2.22
.
1.22
1.41
2.44
1.42
1.91
1.97
5.27
1.86
5.66
4.64
5.47
4.81
4.44
. 1.56
1.41
1.64
5.11
1.61
2.31
Table 15 (continued)
Student
Identification
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
21?
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228.
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
Grade
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
* 2
. 2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Eye
Preference
Right
Right
Right
Right
Right
Right
Right
Right
Left.
Right
Left
Right
Right
Right
Right
Right
Left
Right
Left
Right
Right
Right
Left
Left
Right
Right
Right
Right
Right
Sex
60°/sec»
1.43
Female
Male
1.11
Male
.77
2.50
Female
Male
1.43
Male
i.n
Male
.77 •
Female
■1.11
Male
: .77
Female
.91
Male
.91
Female
.67
Male
1.11
1,67
Male
Male
.77
Male
1.25
Female
.83
Female
.83
Female
1,43
Female
.83
1.2$
Male
Female
1.6?
Male .
1.25
Male
.Tf
Male
.77 .
Male
1.43
Female
.83
Female
1.23
Female
,83
*
DvA scores
90°/sec.
120°/sec.
2.50
2.00
.91
3.33
2.00
3.33.
l.ll
1 .6?
1.11
1,6?
1,67
1.11
1.67
1.25
1.25
2.50
I .25
■ ,91
2.50
1.25
2.00
3.33
3,33
.83
1.25
.91
1.67
3,33
I.25
3.33
2.50
2.00
10.00
5.00
3.33
2.50
2.00
1.67
3.33
3.33
2.50
10.00
2.00
2,00
3.33
2.50
2.50
5.00
10.00
10.00
2.50
2.00
1.6?
2.50
3^33
5.00
5.06
3.33
Average
2.42
1.8?
1.22
5.2?
2.81
2.59
1.46
1.59
1.18
1.97
1.97
1.42
4.26
1,64
1.34
2.36
1.52
1.41
2.97
4.02
4.41
2.50
2.19
I .09
1.50
1.89
2.50
3.19
1.80
Table 15 (continued)
Student
Identification
2
2
2
2
2
236'
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
24?
301
302
303
304
3P5
306
30?
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
. 315
316
Grade
•
2
.2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3'
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Eye
Preference
Sex
Left
Left
Right
Left
Right
Right
Right
Left
Right
Right
Right
Right
Male
Male
Female
Male
Male
Male
Male
Female
Female
Female
"Male
Male
Left
Right
Left
Left
Right
Right
Right
Right
Left
Right
Right
Right
Left
■ Right
Left
Right
Female
Female
Female.
Female
Male
Female
Female
Female
Female
Female
Female
Female
Female
Male
Female
Female
60o/seci,
1.00
.77
DVA scores
90°/sec.
12O0Zsec.
2.00
1.11
1.43
2.00
2.00
2.50
2.50
1.43
2.50
5.00
2.00
2.00
10.00
10.00
1.11
.91
2.50
1.25
2.50
. 1.46
1,13
1.61
1.34
.91
1.43
1.43
2.00
.91
.1.25
.77
.83
.83
1.67
1.25
.77
1.25
Average
O91
1.43
1.66
I .29
1 .6l
.
1.97
I .03
1.52
2.42
4.55
4.4l
1,11
1.25
1.67
1.25
.91
.8%
.83
1.6?
1.43
1.6?
1.67
5.00
2.00
3.33
2.50
.1.25
2.00
*91:
"82
1.43
loll
2.50
2.00
1.31
2.00
3.33
2.50
2.50
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.14
1.80
1.43
1 ,ii
.7?;
.83
1,4%.
.8%.
.77
1.6?
1.43
1,6?
1.43
1.25
2.50
1.25
2.78
1 056
1.89
1.66
1.36 .
1.61
1.76
1.56
1.36
1.11
3.33
2.50
1.46
5.00
10.00
5.55
Table 15 (continued)
Student
Identificaticn
317
318
319
320
321.
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
.344
345
346
Grade
Eye
Preference
Sex
600/sec,
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Left
Left
Right
Right
Left
Right
Left
Left
Right
Right
Left
Right
Right
Left
Left
Right
Left .
Right
Left
Right
Right
Right
Right
Left
Left
Left
Left ■
Left
Right
Left
Male
Male
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Female
Male
Female
Male
Male
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Male
Male
Male
Male
Female
Male
Male
Male
Male
Female
,83
1.11
1.11
DVA scores
90°/sec.
120°/sec.
Average
1«11
1.67
1.20
2.50
2.50
2.50
1.62
1.62
I eI l
«91
1.25
1.25
1.25
2.00
.77
1,67
«91
«77
1.67
3.33
2.00
3.33
.83
2.00
«91
«77
. .91
.83
1.43
2 000
I «43
1 ,6?
3.33
1.43
lo ll
. < &
1.67
2.00
3.33
2.50
1.25
1.67
2.QO
1.43
.83-
2.00
1.00
2
I »43
»91
.7?
I »11 •
«91
.71'
1.6?
.77
• «91
1.25
.. .91
1.25
1.25
.91
I »67
I »11
1.00
2.00
1.62
1.52
1.92
I .67
1.52
1.84
1.66
2 .5 0
2.88
1.44
3.33
2.00
2.50
1.46
1.33
1.77
2.42
1.43
2.50
2.50
2.61
3.33
1.67
2.50
1.27
2.05
4.4?
1.97
10.00
2.50
2.50
2,50
1.43. '
2.50
2.50
1.67
3.33
2.00
1,44
1.41
1.03
1.62
1.55
I.09
2.22
1.29
lo ll
3 . 3 3
1.00
'
2.19
Table 15 (continued)
Student
Identification
401
402
403
404
405 .
406
40?
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
4l6
41?
418' .
.419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
Eye
Grade Preference.
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Left
Left
Right
Left
Right
Right
Right
Right
Right
Left
Right
Right
Left
Left.
Right
Right
Right
Right
Left
Right
Left
Right
Right
Right
Right
Right
Right
Right
Right
Sex
Male
Male
Female
Female
Male
Male
Female
Male
Female
Female
Female
Male
Female
Female
Female
Female
Male '■
Male
Female
■Male
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
■ Male .
. Male
Female
Male
60°/sec,
.6?
DVA scores
12O0Zsec.
90°/sec«
1.11 7
1.25
o77
.77
1.67
.91
1.25
.9%
.91
1.25
1.11
. 1.6?
1.43
1.25
1.25
1.43
191
1.25
1.43
1.6?
2a50
1.15
1.80
1.43
3.33
1,25
2.00
1.25
2.50
1.03
2.50
2.50
2.50
1.25
1.67 .
1,67
2.00
3.33
3.33
.77
1.25
1.25
2.50
, 2.00
.83
1.25
2.50
.77
.83
.83
lo ll
2.00
.77
.77
.71
.91
2600
2.00
1.67
1.00
.91
2.58
2.00
1.67
1.00
2.00
2,00
1.00
.91 •
1,84
1.25
1,27
1.13
1.68
2,22
2.42
1.39
1.64
3.05
1.50
3.33
2.50
.83
Average
1.36
1.36
1.36
'
1.24
1.76
1,66
1.11
1.25
1.23
.99
2.00
.77
1.11
2.00
1.43
1.43
1.25
2.50
3i33
2.00
1.67
1.44
2.14
1.81
.83
.91
2.00
1.24
.83
.71
lo ll
1.29
Table 15 (continued)
Student
Identlf!cation Grade
430
431
432
-
433
434
435
436
437
433
439
440
441
442
443
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Eye .
Preference
Left
Left
Right
. Left
Right
Left
Right
Right
Right
Right
Left
Right
Right
Left
DVA scores
Sex
Male
Male
Male
Male
Male
Male
Male
Female
Female
Female
Female
Male.
Female
Male
90°/secn
12O0Zsec,
2 .0 0
1,00
I »25
1,11
2.50
2.50
.77
1,11
,71
»91
1,25
2,50
. 1,11
.8 3
1,25
1,67
3 .3 3
3 .3 3
2.50
2,00
5.00
6o°/sec9
1,11 "
»77.
.8 3
.71
.67
1 .2 5
1 .4 3
*83
1,25
,71
.
2 .5 0
3 .3 3
Average
1.8?
1.42
1.52
1.71
.8?
1.39
1,57
1.36
3 .3 3
1.25
3 *3 3
3 .3 3
2.63
2.00
*83
l.ll
1,43
1.25
2.50
»92
1.72
1.21
1.67'
&
moktana
O
1/52 10014231 2
H378
E364
c op. 2
DATE
Heintz, Doreen A
The developmental
dynamic visual acuity
status of elementary
students
ISSUED TO