Loading next page...
/lp/american-medical-association/relationship-between-accommodation-and-convergence-yhjBRdqcR0
- Publisher
- American Medical Association
- Copyright
- Copyright © 1952 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
- ISSN
- 0096-6339
- DOI
- 10.1001/archopht.1952.01700030764006
- Publisher site
- See Article on Publisher Site
Abstract
Abstract ONE OF the earliest investigations of the relationship between accommodation and convergence was that of Donders, who wrote: "The state of accommodation of the eyes corresponds to a definite convergence of the visual lines."1 He taught, however, that this "connection is not absolute and casual," but "that there is a certain degree of independence." One of Donders' pupils, Landolt,2 indicated even more forcibly the supposed independence of the two functions, as conceived by Donders: The fact that we can see, distinctly and simultaneously, with both eyes an object situated at an invariable distance, in spite of glasses which necessitate a change in accommodation, is proof positive that the relation between the latter and convergence is not absolute; and in fact, equally easy to demonstrate, that such glasses cannot exceed certain degrees, proves that the independence of the two functions exists only within certain limits. Donders coined the term References 1. Donders, F. C.: Accommodation and Refraction of the Eye , London, The Sydenham Society, 1864, p. 110. 2. Landolt, E.: Refraction and Accommodation of the Eye , Edinburgh, Young J. Pentland, 1886, p. 199. 3. Maddox, E. C.: Clinical Use of Prisms, and the Decentering of Lenses , Ed. 2, Bristol, John Wright & Co., 1893. 4. Maddox,3 p. 106. 5. Maddox,3 p. 83. 6. Maddox,3 p. 86. 7. Maddox,3 p. 91. 8. Maddox,3 p. 94. 9. Cross, A. J.: Dynamic Skiametry in Theory and Practice , New York, A. J. Cross Optical Co., 1911. 10. Bestor, H. M.: Relationship Between Convergence and Accommodation , Am. J. Physiol. Optics 4:228, 1923. 11. Ames, A., and Gliddon, G.: Ocular Measurements , Tr. Sect. Ophth. A. M. A. 26:102, 1928. 12. Stevens, G. T.: The Motor Apparatus of the Eyes , Philadelphia, F. A. Davis Company, 1906. 13. Roelofs, C. O.: Der Zusammenhang zwischen Akkommodation und Konvergenz , von Graefes Arch. Ophth. 85:66, 1913.Crossref 14. Grimm, R.: Über die Möglichkeit, binokular ungleich zu akkommodieren, und über das Wesen der Akkommodation , von Graefes Arch. Ophth. 131:127-138, 1933.Crossref 15. Maxwell, J. T.: Muscle Balance Determinations at the Reading Distance , Arch. Ophth. 26:98 ( (July) ) 1941.Crossref 16. Fox, W. L.: Heterophoria , Am. J. Ophth. 8:110, 1933. 17. Haessler, F. H.: A Factor in the Production of Divergence Increase with Near Vision , Tr. Am. Ophth. Soc. 32:229, 1934 18. Relationship of Heterophoria to Divergence and Convergence Based on Clinical Measurements , Haessler Tr. Am. Ophth. Soc. 35:149, 1937. 19. Duke-Elder, W. S.: Textbook of Ophthalmology , Vol. 4, London, Henry Kimpton, 1949, p. 3982. 20. Duke-Elder,18 p. 3984. 21. Duke-Elder,18 p. 4420. 22. One which Duke-Elder would have seen if his discussion had been continuous, rather than separated by nearly 300 pages. 23. Fry, G. A.: An Experimental Analysis of the Accommodation-Convergence Relation , Am. J. Optom. 14:402, 1937Crossref 24. Further Experiments on the Accommodation-Convergence Relation , Tr. Am. Acad. Optom. 12:65, 1938. 25. Morgan, M. W., Jr., and Olmsted, J. M. D.: Quantitative Measurements of Relative Accommodation and Relative Convergence , Proc. Soc. Exper. Biol. & Med. 41:303, 1939. 26. Emmes, A.: A Statistical Analysis of the Accommodative-Convergence Gradient , Am. J. Optom. 26:474, 1949. 27. Hofstetter, H. W.: (a) The Proximal Factor in Convergence and Accommodation , Am. J. Optom. 19:67, 1942 28. (b) The Zone of Clear Single Binocular Vision, Part N , Hofstetter Am. J. Optom. 22:361, 1945 29. (c) Accommodative Convergence in Squint , Hofstetter Am. J. Optom. 23:417, 1946 30. (d) Accommodative Convergence in Identical Twins , Hofstetter Am. J. Optom. 25:480, 1948. 31. Morgan, M. W., Jr.: (a) Accommodation and Its Relationship to Convergence , Am. J. Optom. 21:183, 1944 32. (b) A Comparison of Clinical Methods of Measuring Accommodative-Convergence , Morgan Am. J. Optom. 27:385, 1950. 33. Morgan, M. W., Jr., and Peters, H.: Accommodative-Convergence in Presbyopia , Am. J. Optom. 28:3, 1951. 34. Hofstetter.25a Morgan.26a 35. Ogle, K. N., and Prangen, A. deH.: Further Considerations of Fixation Disparity in the Binocular Fusional Processes , Am. J. Ophth. 34:57 (May, (Pt. 2) ) 1951. 36. Morgan, M. W., Jr.: Clinical Aspects of Accommodation and Convergence , Am. J. Optom. 21:301, 1944.Crossref 37. Scobee, R. G.: The Oculorotary Muscles , St. Louis, C. V. Mosby Company, 1947. D. 113. 38. Cogan, D.: Neurology of the Ocular Muscles , Springfield, Ill., Charles C Thomas, Publisher, 1948. 39. Hofstetter.25a Morgan.26 40. A rule for determining the convergence, in terms of prism diopters, for any subject at any fixation distance is to multiply the subject's interpupillary distance, in centimeters, by the fixation distance, in diopters. Thus, for these examples, 6 × 2.5 = 15Δ. 41. Scobee,31 pp. 131 and 138. 42. Hofstetter. H.: Personal communication to the author; Am. J. Optom., to be published. 43. Ittelson, W. H., and Ames. A., Jr.: Accommodation, Convergence and Their Relation to Apparent Distance , J. Psychol. 30:43, 1950.Crossref
Journal
A.M.A. Archives of Ophthalmology – American Medical Association
Published: Jun 1, 1952
@Phil_Robichaud
@deepthiw
@JoseServera