Comparison and Correlation between Distance Static Stereoacuity and Dynamic Stereoacuity

원거리 정적 입체시와 동적 입체시의 평가 및 상관관계

  • Received : 2015.08.12
  • Accepted : 2015.09.09
  • Published : 2015.09.30


Purpose: This study evaluated the static stereoacuity by Distance Randot Stereotest (STEREO OPTICAL. Co., Inc. USA) and the dynamic stereoacuity by three-rods test (iNT, Korea). Criterion and correlation of stereoacuity between both tests and usefulness of two stereotest methods were also evaluated. Methods: For normal adults of 109 (male 61, female 48), mean age of 20.88 (19-32 years) years old, static stereoacuity by using Distance Randot Stereotest at 3 m distance, dynamic stereoacuity by using three-rods test at 2.5 m distance were measured. Results: The mean of distance static stereoacuity was $155.77{\pm}133.11sec$ of arc and the mean of error distance dynamic stereoacuity $11.13{\pm}9.69mm$. With equivalent-conversion stereoacuity of $23.44{\pm}20.96sec$ of arc, there was statistically significant differences (p=0.00) between two dynamic stereoacuity, but correlation was relatively low (${\rho}=0.226$). In the case of dynamic stereoacuity, separated to normal range by criterion of the error distance 20 mm, it showed the error distance of less than 20 mm in 97 subjects(89%) whose average of error distance and conversion mean dynamic stereoacuity were $8.43{\pm}5.10mm$ and $17.68{\pm}10.67sec$ of arc. repectively. The error distance of was equivalent-conversion dynamic stereoacuity 40.99 sec of arc (PD 62 mm basis) was 20 mm. Conclusions: The results of lower correlation between static and dynamic stereoacuity suggest that seterotest should be applied separately to different functions. The results of this study also suggest that Distance Randot Stereotest can be applied to static stereoacuity excluding monocular cues. Three-rods test can be applied to dynamic stereoacuity containing the response of the eye-hand coordination in the daily life of natural vision condition, including the monocular cues. These different approaches canprovide a criterion of the two stereoacuity and parallel use of the two tests would be useful. For dynamic stereoacuity by three-rods test, error distance 20 mm in a normal range of adults can be used as a criteria to get statistical meaning of the results.


Distance stereoacuity;Distance static stereoacuity;Distance dynamic stereoacuity;Distance randot stereotest;Three-rods test;Monocular cue


  1. Von Noorden GK. Binocular vision and ocular motility, 5th Ed. St. Louis: Mosby, 1996;8-40.
  2. Kim TN. Binocular vision, 1st Ed. Seoul: Shinkwang Pub, 2010;15-28.
  3. Wong BP, Woods RL, Peli E. Stereoacuity at distance and near. Optom Vis Sci. 2002;79(12):771-778.
  4. Marsh WR, Rawlings SC, Mumma JV. Evaluation of clinical stereoacuity test. Ophthalmology. 1980;87(12):1265-1272.
  5. Min BM, Park WC. The relationship between visual acuity and titmus stereoacuity. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 1987;28(6):1339-1342.
  6. Zanoni D, Rosenbaum AL. A new method for evaluating distance stereo acuity. J Pediatric Ophthalmol Strabismus. 1991;28(5):255-260.
  7. Fu VL, Birch EE, Holmes JM. Assessment of a new distance randot stereoacuity test. J AAPOS. 2006;10(5):419-423.
  8. Shim HS, Choi SM, Kim YC. Assessment of dynamic stereoacuity of adults in their 20s’ with Howard-Dolman test. J Korean Ophthalmic Opt Soc. 2015;20(1):61-66.
  9. Rovai, AP, Jason DB, Michael KP. Social science research design and statistics: A practitioner's guide to research methods and IBM SPSS, 2nd Ed. Watertree Press LLC, 2013;375.
  10. Holmes JM, Fawcett SL. Testing distance stereoacuity with the Frisby-Davis(FD2) test. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005;139(1):193-195.
  11. Kim SJ, Kim SY. Normal distance stereoacuity by age assessed by the Frisby Davis distance stereotest. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2008;49(1):158-163.
  12. Matsuo T, Negayama R, Sakata H, Hasebe K. Correlation between depth perception by three-rods test and stereoacuity by distance randot stereotest. Strabismus. 2014; 22(3):133-137.
  13. Pettigrew JD. Binocular neurons which signal change of disparity in area 18 of cat visual cortex. Nat New Biol. 1973;241(108):123-124.
  14. Tyler CW. A stereoscopic view of visual processing streams. Vision Res. 1990;30(11):1877-1895.
  15. Hart WM. Adler's physiology of the eye, 9th Ed. St. Louis: Mosby, 1992;773-810.
  16. Lim KH, Hong HJ. Dynamic stereoacuity in normal individuals. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2000;41(11):2408-2414.
  17. Frisby JP, Mein J, Saye A, Stanworth A. Use of randomdot sterograms in the clinical assessment of strabismic patients. Br J Ophthalmol. 1975;59(10):545-552.
  18. Cooper J, Feldman J. Random-dot-stereogram performance by strabismic, amblyopic, and ocular-pathology patients in an operant-discrimination task. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1978;55(9):599-609.

Cited by

  1. Changes in Distance Static Stereopsis with Breath Alcohol Concentration vol.22, pp.1, 2017,
  2. Comparison of Dynamic Stereoacuity According to Monocular Cue vol.22, pp.2, 2017,
  3. Comparison of Dynamic Stereoacuity in Terms of Test Distance vol.23, pp.4, 2018,
  4. Contrast Sensitivity of Dominant and Non-Dominant Eyes in Adults vol.23, pp.4, 2018,