IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0152214.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Psychophysical Evaluation of Congenital Colour Vision Deficiency: Discrimination between Protans and Deutans Using Mollon-Reffin’s Ellipses and the Farnsworth-Munsell 100-Hue Test

Author

Listed:
  • Natáli Valim Oliver Bento-Torres
  • Anderson Raiol Rodrigues
  • Maria Izabel Tentes Côrtes
  • Daniela Maria de Oliveira Bonci
  • Dora Fix Ventura
  • Luiz Carlos de Lima Silveira

Abstract

We have used the Farnsworth-Munsell 100-hue (FM 100) test and Mollon-Reffin (MR) test to evaluate the colour vision of 93 subjects, 30.4 ± 9.7 years old, who had red-green congenital colour vision deficiencies. All subjects lived in Belém (State of Pará, Brazil) and were selected by the State of Pará Traffic Department. Selection criteria comprised the absence of visual dysfunctions other than Daltonism and no history of systemic diseases that could impair the visual system performance. Results from colour vision deficient were compared with those from 127 normal trichromats, 29.3 ± 10.3 years old. For the MR test, measurements were taken around five points of the CIE 1976 colour space, along 20 directions irradiating from each point, in order to determine with high-resolution the corresponding colour discrimination ellipses (MacAdam ellipses). Three parameters were used to compare results obtained from different subjects: diameter of circle with same ellipse area, ratio between ellipse’s long and short axes, and ellipse long axis angle. For the FM 100 test, the parameters were: logarithm of the total number of mistakes and positions of mistakes in the FM diagram. Data were also simultaneously analysed in two or three dimensions as well as by using multidimensional cluster analysis. For the MR test, Mollon-Reffin Ellipse #3 (u’ = 0.225, v’ = 0.415) discriminated more efficiently than the other four ellipses between protans and deutans once it provided larger angular difference in the colour space between protan and deutan confusion lines. The MR test was more sensitive than the FM 100 test. It separated individuals by dysfunctional groups with greater precision, provided a more sophisticated quantitative analysis, and its use is appropriate for a more refined evaluation of different phenotypes of red-green colour vision deficiencies.

Suggested Citation

  • Natáli Valim Oliver Bento-Torres & Anderson Raiol Rodrigues & Maria Izabel Tentes Côrtes & Daniela Maria de Oliveira Bonci & Dora Fix Ventura & Luiz Carlos de Lima Silveira, 2016. "Psychophysical Evaluation of Congenital Colour Vision Deficiency: Discrimination between Protans and Deutans Using Mollon-Reffin’s Ellipses and the Farnsworth-Munsell 100-Hue Test," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-21, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0152214
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152214
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0152214
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0152214&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0152214?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0152214. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.