Spatial contrast sensitivity: effects of age, test–retest, and psychophysical method

Abstract

Spatial contrast sensitivity was tested twice in normal subjects from five age groups by using each of two different psychophysical methods. Results obtained by the method of adjustment showed a decline in sensitivity with increasing age at all spatial frequencies. In contrast, the forced-choice procedure yielded results indicating an age-related decline predominantly at high spatial frequencies, with the magnitude of the decline being generally similar to that obtained earlier by a tracking method [Vision Res. 23, 689 (1983)]. The decline that we observed cannot be due to pupillary changes with age, since this factor was controlled. Moreover, we suggest that the high-spatial-frequency decline in contrast sensitivity, although it is comparatively small, is too large to be due to changes in lens density. We therefore suggest that a neural component is responsible. In addition, interactions among the age of the subject, the spatial frequency used, and the psychophysical method used suggest that the method of adjustment should be avoided for age-related studies of vision.

Mesopic radial frequency contrast sensitivity function for young and older adults

“…Our results for the CSF under these conditions are similar to those reported in the literature that show less contrast sensitivity for older adults at all spatial frequencies (8)(9)(10)16). These results also show a similar trend in the data for radial frequencies ( Figure 2A).…”

“…Although there is no general consensus about the frequency ranges that are affected by aging, psychophysical studies on humans using photopic conditions found i) reduction of contrast sensitivity in medium and high spatial and angular frequencies with age, and ii) significant declines in CSF, only when volunteers were 50 years old (3,(6)(7)(8)(9)(10).…”

“…The use of lower level contrast (i.e., medium luminance of 0.5 cd/m 2 ) explains in some way the displacement of the maximum sensitivity range towards the very low radial frequency (i.e., 0.25 cpd). The CSF shape changes according to viewing conditions (8,9).…”

Effects of aging in retinal image quality

“…Nevertheless, there is not general agreement regarding either who should be considered a normal old subject 7 or the finding of a general, standard procedure for contrast-sensitivity measurements. 8 In addition, optical factors such as pupil size, accommodation, and refractive state have the potential to introduce variability in contrast sensitivity, although recent studies conducted with an accurate control of these factors 6 ' 9 have provided strong evidence for a decline in contrast sensitivity with age. Both optical and neural factors must play some role in the reduction of spatial visual performance with age, but their relative contributions are not well known.…”

Portable LCD Image Quality: Effects of Surround Luminance

“…The wealth of data in the literature also reports a variety of changes in CSF shape with senescence, (Owsley et al, 1983;Tulunay-Keesey et al, 1988;Higgins et al, 1988;Rohaly & Owsley, 1993;Pardhan, 2004) eccentricity (Rovamo et al, 1978;Koenderink et al, 1979;Wright & Johnston, 1983;Johnston, 1987;Snodderly et al, 1992) and degree of adaptation to noise (Farchild & Johnson, 2007) in a given stimulus. Briefly, luminance CSFs for older subjects exhibit losses in contrast sensitivity at the higher frequencies, although much of the loss is attributed to optical factors.…”