Resolution acuity versus recognition acuity with Landolt-style optotypes

Abstract

Background: International standards define acuity as the reciprocal of the threshold gap size of a Landolt C optotype. However, the literature is inconsistent as to what type of acuity is measured with Landolt Cs. The present study addresses this question more directly than previous studies by quantifying the effect of an inherent luminance artifact in Landolt-style optotypes.

Methods: Two groups of modified optotypes were used. In the first group, each optotype had a single gap structure with the same average luminance. Between optotypes, the gap structures differed in their degree of fineness. In the second group of optotypes, a standard gap was always present, defining the orientation of the optotype. Additional gap structures of the same average luminance, but different fineness, were inserted at the remaining potential gap locations, thereby balancing luminance across potential gap locations. Visual acuity measures were obtained for each optotype variant, using a computer-based test employing a staircase procedure.

Results: Similar acuity values were obtained for all optotypes of the first group, and for standard Landolt Cs, irrespective of the fineness of the gap structure. With luminance-balanced optotypes of the second group, measured acuity was halved, compared to standard optotypes.

Conclusions: The results support the view that it is recognition acuity, rather than resolution acuity, which is measured with standard Landolt-style optotypes, with the imbalanced luminance distribution serving as a cue. Luminance-balanced optotypes may help to obtain a more veridical estimate of resolution acuity, although recognition acuity may be more relevant in daily living.