OSA's Digital Library

Journal of the Optical Society of America

Journal of the Optical Society of America

  • Vol. 59, Iss. 1 — Jan. 1, 1969
  • pp: 97–100

Latency Variation in Human Pupil Contraction Due to Stimulus Luminance and/or Adaptation Level

ROBERT E. LEE, GERALD H. COHEN, and ROBERT M. BOYNTON  »View Author Affiliations

JOSA, Vol. 59, Issue 1, pp. 97-100 (1969)

View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (781 KB)

Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools



The purpose of this experiment is to measure the latency to onset of the contraction of the pupil, as a function of the size of positive steps in luminance, starting at various luminance levels to which the eye has been adapted prior to the stimulus steps. In the past, latency of the pupil response has been inaccurately measured, owing to the difficulty of separating the end of the latent period from the slow beginning of contraction. To overcome this, a digital curve-fitting technique involving a time delay followed by a modified second-order step response was developed. Latency was defined as the time delay giving the most accurate fit.

Because the curve-fitting procedure needed a response with less random variation than is normally present, an average was used. Such averaging was first justified by using the standard deviation to show that there is probably no significant variation of latency for responses of a given subject under identical stimulus conditions. This analysis also showed that 20 responses is an efficient number to average for the pupil-contraction system.

The excellent agreement between each average experimental response and the computed fit verified the value of delay used in the computation. Latency, thus defined for each stimulus condition, was found to be primarily a function of luminance during the step and only secondarily of the ratio of the step change of luminance to the adaptation luminance.

ROBERT E. LEE, GERALD H. COHEN, and ROBERT M. BOYNTON, "Latency Variation in Human Pupil Contraction Due to Stimulus Luminance and/or Adaptation Level," J. Opt. Soc. Am. 59, 97-100 (1969)

Sort:  Author  |  Journal  |  Reset


  1. L. Stark, Proc. IRE. 49, 1925 (1959).
  2. M. Clynes, Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 98, 806 (1962).
  3. D. Green, Ph.D. thesis, Northwestern University (1964).
  4. E. Adrian and R. Matthews, J. Phys. 64, 279 (1927b).
  5. E. Johnson and N. Bartlett, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 46, 167 (1956).
  6. H. Hartline, H. Wagner and E. MacNichol, Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 17, 125 (1952).
  7. N. Bartlett and S. MacLeod, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 44, 306 (1954).
  8. B. Arden and R. Weale, Proc. Roy. Soc. (London) B142, 258 (1954).
  9. J. Roufs, Vis. Res. 3, 81 (1963).
  10. O. Lowenstein and I. Loewenfeld, Am. J. Ophthalmol. 48, 87 (1949).
  11. O. Lowenstein, H. Kawabata, and I. Loewenfeld, Am. J. Ophthalmol. 57, 569 (1964).
  12. M. Alpern, D. McCready, and L. Barr, J. Gen. Physiol. 47, 265 (1963).
  13. L. Kumnick, J. Geront. 11, 391 (1956).
  14. R. Feinberg and E. Pololak, in Behazvior, Aging and the Nervous Systein, by A. Welford and J. Birren (C. C. Thomas, Springfield, Ill. 1965).
  15. Further description of the search procedure and a complete Fortran program for the procedure can be found in the thesis, "Effect of Adaptation Level and Stimulus Amplitude on Latency to Contraction of the Human Pupil Reflex," by R. E. Lee, which is available from University Microfilms, Inc. as Order No. 66–10, 810.

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited