This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

H. S. WELSMAN, M.D.; CLEMENT McCULLOCH, M.D.

AMA Arch Ophthalmol. 1955;53(5):694-699.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

The fields of vision are tested clinically by using a chosen working distance and by varying the size of the test object. This method is convenient and by custom has become part of the practice of ophthalmology. However, this scheme of testing, and the mathematical analysis which obviously results, leads to a fallacious understanding of the limits of visual space.

The error arises from the fact that in daily experience observers are not considering 0bjects which vary in size, but are concerned with objects which remain constant in size and vary in distance. A baseball does not grow or shrink in size; it comes nearer or goes away. The size of the visual field for a given object varies with the apparent size of the object, which is a function of the distance of the object from the observer. The mushroom-shaped island of vision so often reproduced from the . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Guelph, Ont., Canada; Toronto, Canada

From Institute of Aviation Medicine, R. C. A. F., and Department of Ophthalmology, University of Toronto.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?