Pupillary Physiology
Stuart R. Steinhauer, Ph.D.
Biometrics Research Program
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine
& VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System
(http://www.wpic.pitt.edu/research/biometrics)
Society for Psychophysiological Research Workshop, Boston, September 14, 2011
little is achieved by one alone,
Thanks to all of the following:
Greg J. Siegle, Ph.D.
Ruth Condray, Ph.D.
Samay Jain, M.D.
Beatrice Chakraborty, Psy.D.
Adam L. Clarke, B.S.
Erin E. Kelly, B.S.
J. Richard Jennings, Shirley Y. Hill, Lisa A. Morrow
Gad Hakerem, Joseph Zubin, Samuel Sutton
Work has been supported by the Department of Veterans Affairs and
National Institute of Mental Health
Pupil of the Eye.net
• Pupil of the Eye ... United in Spirit ... In Service
to All
•
• “Bahá'u'lláh once compared the coloured people
to the black pupil of the eye surrounded by the
white. In this black pupil you see the reflection of
that which is before it, and through it the light of
the Spirit shines forth. In the sight of God colour
makes no difference at all, He looks at the hearts
of men. That which God desires from men is the
heart...”
Gray’s Anatomy, 20th Ed., via Wikipedia
http://www.ndrs.scot.nhs.uk/Train/Handbook/drh-21.htm
http://www.army-technology.com/features/feature1644/feature1644-4.html
www.center4sight.com/anisocoria
Measuring sustained cognitive
load via pupil dilation
Horizontal Diameter Measured to .025 mm, 60/sec
Average Pupillary Light Reaction
Start
6.5
Amplitude of
Light Reaction
End
6
Light
Time (ms)
3400
3000
2600
2200
1800
1400
1000
600
200
5.5
-200
Pupil Diamter (mm)
7
Alexandritis, 1985
n.III Oculomotor
Nucleus
Edinger Westphal Nucleus
(4 on right figure)
Alexandritis, 1985
Hypothalamic Nuclei
Posterior
Hypothalamic
Nuclei
(sympathetic)
Lowenstein, 1955
Dilation
Inhibition of
Constriction
7
Hypothalamus
12
Oculomotor
nucleus
White & Depue, J.Pers.Soc.Psychol., 1999, quoting Ranson & Clark, 1959
White & Depue, J.Pers.Soc.Psychol., 1999, quoting Ranson & Clark, 1959
Autonomic Contributions to Pupillary Dilation
Parasympathetic
Time Course of Prestimulus;
Immediate
300-500 msec (motor)
Processing:
600-1000 msec
Sympathetic
1100-1500 msec
Task sensitivity: Sustained Processing
(memory, effort)
Motor Initiation
Anticipatory Responses
Immediate Processing
of Stimulus Significance
Increasing
Ambient Light:
No substantial
differences
(within limits)
Increased response with
smaller initial diameter
Orienting Responses
Experimental Dissociation of
Sympathetic and Parasympathetic Components
Parasympathetic
Sympathetic
Recording in Dark:
Minimize Dilation
Normal Dilation
Recording in Light:
Increase Dilation
Normal Dilation
No Dilation
Normal Dilation
Normal Dilation
No Dilation
Digit Span
Serial Subtraction
Motor Responses
(Voluntary, Cued)
“Oddball” Counting
& Choice Reaction
Guessing
Missing Stimulus
Paradigm
Block sphincter:
Block dilator:
Tasks:
Serial “Subtraction” Task
Begin Data
Collection
Instructions:
End Data
Collection
Verbalize
Subtract 7
or Add 1
5 sec
Reticular Activating
System inhibits EdingerWestphal center of
Oculomotor Nucleus
60 sec
Prefrontal Cortex (PFC) inhibits E-W
&
Activates Posterior Hypothalamus
Pupil Diameter Increases With Task Demand
Steinhauer et al., Int. J. Psychophysiology, 2004
What can interfere with the light reflex?
(other than brightness, visual field, hue)
• Fear (Szabadi, Bitsios, 1996)
• Apprehension (Loewenfeld, 1958; 1993)
• Motor response (Loewenfeld, 1993;
Gavriysky, 1991)
• Cognition (Steinhauer, 2000)
Motor Response cued by tone inhibits Light Reaction even after onset of light stimulus
Light Reaction Amplitude by Cue Delay
Control =8
Light Reaction (mm)
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
No Cue
-1000
-750
-500
-250
0
250
Cue to Light onset (msec)
Light Duration = 1000 msec, Tone Duration = 40 msec
500
Effect of Task Demand on Light Reaction
Light Reaction, Superimposed at Baseline
Placebo
0.2
Change in
Diameter (mm)
0
-0.2
Placebo, Subtract 7
-0.4
-0.6
Placebo, Add 1
-0.8
Placebo, No Task
-1
Light Stimulus
-200 200 600 1000 1400 1800 2200 2600 3000 3400
(n = 29 healthy subjects) Time (msec)
Prestimulus Pupil Diameter
7.0
Pre-stimulus Diameter (mm)
Group: F1,35 = 5.6, p=0.008
6.5
6.0
Condition: F 1.4,50.1 = 47.1 , p < 0.001
GROUP
5.5
Control
5.0
Schizophrenic
4.5
Light Only
Alcoholic
Serial +1
Serial -7
Constriction: Group by Condition
1.6
Condition: F 1.6,56.6 = 5.99, p = 0.007
Change in Diameter (mm)
1.4
1.2
1
Light Only
Add 1
Subtract 7
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
Control = 12
Alcohol = 15
Schizophrenic = 11
Loewenfeld, 1993
Dapiprazole
Loewenfeld, 1993
Blockade of Sphincter or Dilator on Diameter
in relation to Task Demand
Steinhauer et al., Int. J. Psychophysiology, 2004
Average Pupillary Light Reaction
Start
6.5
Amplitude of
Light Reaction
End
6
Light
Time (ms)
3400
3000
2600
2200
1800
1400
1000
600
200
5.5
-200
Pupil Diamter (mm)
7
Placebo
Dapiprazole
(Block Dilator)
Tropicamide
(Block Sphincter)
8
No Task and Add 1
superimposed
7.5
Diameter (mm)
7
Subtract 7
6.5
6
Add 1
No Task
5.5
5
4.5
4
Time (msec)
Steinhauer & Zubin, 1982
Recording in Light
Recording in Darkness
0.14
0.14
0.12
0.1
Sympathetic
0.08
Parasympathetic
0.06
Summation
0.04
0.02
Change in Diameter (mm)
Change in Diameter (mm)
0.12
0.1
Sympathetic
0.08
Parasympathetic
0.06
Summation
0.04
0.02
0
0
300
600
900
1200
1500
Time (msec)
Steinhauer & Hakerem, 1992
300
600
900
Time (msec)
1200
1500
Cued Response: Placebo
Cued-Dark
Cued-Light
Change in Pupil
Diameter (mm)
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
-0.02
-992 -592 -192 208 608 1008 1408 1808 2208 2608
Time (msec)
Self Initiated Response: Placebo
Change in Pupil
Diameter (mm)
0.05
Placebo-Dark
0.03
Placebo-Light
0.01
-0.01
-0.03
-0.05
-0.07
-992 -592 -192 208
608 1008 1408 1808 2208 2608
Time (msec)
Stimulus Synchronized vs. SelfInitiated Responses
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
Stim: Dark
Stim: Light
Self: Dark
Self: Light
0.02
0
-0.02
-0.04
-0.06
-9
92
-5
92
-1
92
20
8
60
8
10
08
14
08
18
08
22
08
26
08
Diameter (mm)
0.12
(n = 11 healthy subjects)
Time (ms)
Cued Response:
Dapiprazole (Block Dilator)
Cued Response: Placebo
Cued-Dark
Cued-Light
0.08
0.06
CuedDark
0.08
0.06
CuedLight
0.04
0.02
0
-0.02
-992 -592 -192 208 608 1008 1408 1808 2208 2608
0.04
Time (msec)
0.02
0
Cued Response:
Tropicamide (Block Sphincter)
-0.02
-992 -592 -192 208 608 1008 14081808 2208 2608
0.1
Time (msec)
Change in Pupil
Diameter (mm)
Change in Pupil
Diameter (mm)
0.1
Change in
Pupil Diameter
(mm)
0.1
0.08
0.06
Cued-Dark
Cued-Light
0.04
0.02
0
-0.02
-992 -592 -192 208 608 10081408180822082608
(n = 11 healthy subjects)
Time (msec)
Harrison et al., SCAN, 2006
Irene E. Loewenfeld, Ph.D.
Dept. of Neurology, Columbia University
Kresge Eye Institute, Wayne State University
Funded by the National Library of Medicine Grant #G08
LM07919-02
A collaboration of the Spencer S. Eccles Health Sciences
Library, University of Utah, and the North American
Neuro-Ophthalmology Society (NANOS)
H. Stanley Thompson, M.D.
Randy Kardon, M.D.
Neuro-opthalmology Service, University of Iowa
Gad Hakerem & Irene Loewenfeld, 2005 Pupil Colloquium, NY
Eckhard Hess
Daniel Kahneman, Ph.D.
Jackson Beatty, Ph.D.
Iridology?