Table 1.
Participant Demographics.
Fig 1.
Four data sets are depicted: Visual acuity (left panel) and contrast sensitivity (right panel) at photopic luminance (green triangles, near top left and at scotopic luminance (blue discs, near bottom left). Result of the first test on the abscissa, second test on the ordinate. Grey 45°-line is the identity line, next to it the ± limits of agreement (photopic, dashed; scotopic, dotted). Visual acuity in logMAR units have an inverted scale, and contrast sensitivity is in logCSWeber units, meaning that better performance corresponds to the top right for both graphs. As expected, photopic measures of VA or CS are markedly better than scotopic ones. The 95% limits of agreement are remarkably similar. All in all, there is no marked deviation from a normal distribution, and the reliability is good for the range measured.
Table 2.
Associations with scotopic VA and CS.
Fig 2.
Correlation between scotopic VA and photopic VA.
Visual acuity in logMAR units have an inverted scale, meaning that better performance is shown here with a higher score. Photopic VA explained 4.1% of the variance in scotopic VA.
Fig 3.
Correlation between scotopic CS and photopic CS.
Contrast sensitivity is in logCSWeber units, meaning that better performance is a higher score. Photopic CS explained 2.5% of the variance in scotopic CS.
Fig 4.
Correlation between scotopic VA and scotopic CS.
Visual acuity in logMAR units have an inverted scale, and contrast sensitivity is in logCSWeber units, meaning that better performance corresponds to the top right. Scotopic VA explained 67.1% of the variance in scotopic CS.
Fig 5.
Correlation between scotopic VA, scotopic CS, and task duration.
Visual acuity in logMAR units have an inverted scale, and contrast sensitivity is in logCSWeber units, meaning that better performance corresponds to higher scores. Task duration is shown on a log scale and explained 27% of the variance in scotopic VA and CS.