Display options
Share it on

Front Psychol. 2017 Jun 30;8:1132. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01132. eCollection 2017.

The Glare Effect Test and the Impact of Age on Luminosity Thresholds.

Frontiers in psychology

Alessio Facchin, Roberta Daini, Daniele Zavagno

Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Milano-BicoccaMilan, Italy.
  2. Milan Center for NeuroscienceMilan, Italy.
  3. Optics and Optometry Research CentreMilan, Italy.

PMID: 28713326 PMCID: PMC5492864 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01132

Abstract

The glare effect (GE) is an illusion in which a white region appears self-luminous when surrounded by linearly decreasing luminance ramps. It has been shown that the magnitude of the luminosity effect can be modulated by manipulating the luminance range of the gradients. In the present study we tested the thresholds for the GE on two groups of adults: young (20-30 years old) and elderly (60-75 years old). Purpose of our perspective study was to test the possibility of transforming the GE into a test that could easily measure thresholds for luminosity and discomfort glare. The Glare Effect Test (GET) consisted in 101 printed cards that differed from each other for the range of luminance ramps. Participants were assessed with GET and a battery of visual tests: visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, illusion of length perception, and Ishihara test. Specifically in the GET, participants were required to classify cards on the basis of two reference cards (solid black-no gradient; full range black to white gradient). PSEs of the GE show no correlation with the other visual tests, revealing a divergent validity. A significant difference between young and elderly was found: contrary to our original expectations, luminosity thresholds of GE for elderly were higher than those for young, suggesting a non-direct relationship between luminosity perception and discomfort glare.

Keywords: aging; glare effect; illusion sensitivity; perception

References

  1. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2005 Jun;24(1):173-6 - PubMed
  2. Percept Psychophys. 1999 Jul;61(5):786-97 - PubMed
  3. Exp Brain Res. 2002 May;144(2):224-37 - PubMed
  4. Perception. 2005;34(3):261-74 - PubMed
  5. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000 Jul;41(8):2015-8 - PubMed
  6. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012 Apr;153(4):587-93 - PubMed
  7. Spat Vis. 2006;19(2-4):219-61 - PubMed
  8. Ophthalmology. 1992 Jul;99(7):1045-9 - PubMed
  9. Perception. 1994;23(9):991-1006 - PubMed
  10. Perception. 1999;28(7):835-8 - PubMed
  11. Front Aging Neurosci. 2016 Aug 22;8:198 - PubMed
  12. Vision Res. 1998 Jan;38(2):209-29 - PubMed
  13. Arch Ophthalmol. 1960 Oct;64:502-14 - PubMed
  14. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2004 Feb;5(2):87-96 - PubMed
  15. Vision Res. 1993 Dec;33(18):2589-609 - PubMed
  16. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1986;224(5):463-6 - PubMed
  17. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2009 May;29(3):345-50 - PubMed
  18. Br J Ophthalmol. 1993 Aug;77(8):489-91 - PubMed
  19. Vision Res. 1986;26(9):1507-12 - PubMed
  20. Vision Res. 1983;23(7):689-99 - PubMed
  21. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1986 Jul;27(7):1131-6 - PubMed
  22. Perception. 2006;35(5):701-7 - PubMed
  23. Perception. 2006;35(11):1573-7 - PubMed
  24. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh). 1979 Aug;57(4):679-90 - PubMed
  25. Can J Exp Psychol. 2002 Sep;56(3):164-76 - PubMed
  26. Perception. 2001;30(2):209-22 - PubMed
  27. Perception. 2010;39(11):1504-13 - PubMed

Publication Types