Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Comparison of the Ratio Between Anterior and Posterior Curvature Centered on the Thinnest Point (A/B Ratio) in Normal and Keratoconus Eyes.

Translational vision science & technology·2026
Same author

The impact of contact lenses on binocular vision in patients with Keratoconus.

Journal of optometry·2026
Same author

Psychometric Assessment of the Metamorphopsia Questionnaire in Patients with Macular Diseases Receiving Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Treatment.

Journal of clinical medicine·2026
Same author

Visual outcomes following implantation of intracorneal rings with sharp and round triangular cross-section designs in keratoconus.

International ophthalmology·2026
Same author

The correlation between myopia severity and stress-strain index (SSI) using the Corneal Visualization Scheimpflug Technology (Corvis ST).

Scientific reports·2025
Same author

Randomized contralateral eye study of myopia control between aspheric multifocal soft contact lens and orthokeratology in children.

Contact lens & anterior eye : the journal of the British Contact Lens Association·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 6, 2026

Binocular Dynamic Visual Acuity in Eyeglass-Corrected Myopic Patients
07:06

Binocular Dynamic Visual Acuity in Eyeglass-Corrected Myopic Patients

Published on: March 29, 2022

3.2K

Comparing accommodative function between the dominant and non-dominant eye.

Hamed Momeni-Moghaddam1, Colm McAlinden, Abbas Azimi

  • 1Health Promotion Research Center, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, Iran, hmomeni_opt@yahoo.com.

Graefe'S Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology = Albrecht Von Graefes Archiv Fur Klinische Und Experimentelle Ophthalmologie
|October 26, 2013
PubMed
Summary

The dominant eye exhibits slightly better accommodative amplitude (AA) and facility (AF) compared to the non-dominant eye in young adults. However, differences in accommodative lag between eyes were not statistically significant.

More Related Videos

Assessing Binocular Central Visual Field and Binocular Eye Movements in a Dichoptic Viewing Condition
07:45

Assessing Binocular Central Visual Field and Binocular Eye Movements in a Dichoptic Viewing Condition

Published on: July 21, 2020

4.0K
Quantification of Oculomotor Responses and Accommodation Through Instrumentation and Analysis Toolboxes
08:27

Quantification of Oculomotor Responses and Accommodation Through Instrumentation and Analysis Toolboxes

Published on: March 3, 2023

1.6K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 6, 2026

Binocular Dynamic Visual Acuity in Eyeglass-Corrected Myopic Patients
07:06

Binocular Dynamic Visual Acuity in Eyeglass-Corrected Myopic Patients

Published on: March 29, 2022

3.2K
Assessing Binocular Central Visual Field and Binocular Eye Movements in a Dichoptic Viewing Condition
07:45

Assessing Binocular Central Visual Field and Binocular Eye Movements in a Dichoptic Viewing Condition

Published on: July 21, 2020

4.0K
Quantification of Oculomotor Responses and Accommodation Through Instrumentation and Analysis Toolboxes
08:27

Quantification of Oculomotor Responses and Accommodation Through Instrumentation and Analysis Toolboxes

Published on: March 3, 2023

1.6K

Area of Science:

  • Ophthalmology
  • Optometry
  • Vision Science

Background:

  • Eye dominance influences visual perception and performance.
  • Understanding differences in accommodation between eyes is crucial for visual health assessments.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare accommodative amplitude (AA), accommodative facility (AF), and accommodative lag between dominant and non-dominant eyes.
  • Investigate potential functional differences in the visual system based on eye dominance.

Main Methods:

  • Seventy university students (mean age 21.2 years) participated.
  • Eye dominance determined by the hole-in-the-card method.
  • AA measured via push-up method, AF with flipper lenses, and lag using MEM retinoscopy at 40 cm.

Main Results:

  • The right eye was dominant in 75.7% of participants.
  • Dominant eyes showed statistically superior AA (12.48 D) and AF (12.45 cpm) compared to non-dominant eyes (AA: 12.16 D, AF: 12.20 cpm).
  • No significant difference was found in accommodative lag between dominant and non-dominant eyes (P > 0.05).

Conclusions:

  • Young adults demonstrate slightly enhanced accommodative amplitude and facility in their dominant eye.
  • These observed differences, while statistically significant, may not be clinically significant.
  • Accommodative lag shows no significant variation between dominant and non-dominant eyes.