Inspired by this vision question.

17–17

11/10. That’s with my glasses, though, and the script in these is almost 10 years old.

I can only read as far as the 2 on each side.

So… do we put our nose on the 0, or something? I’ve tried a few ways and I can see all the way to17 on each one. Sure it’s blurry, but I can recognize it as the end of the line of numbers, and if it was something on the side during driving I would notice it. Would I need to recognize exactly what it is?

I can clearly see 2 – 1 – 0 – 1. Beyond that, I can see there is something there but I can;t read it without shifting focus. This is only with the right eye, I can’t see anything at all with my left.

I am amazed… just shocked that some of you can see so wide so clearly.

With my narrow vision, I hope auto insurance companies don’t discover this phenomenon to raise the rates of those like me with poor peripheral vision.

I can see all of the numbers no matter what (both eyes, left eye, right eye), but I can only read (that is, definitively make out the shapes) as follows:

Both eyes: 7 – 7
Left eye: 6 – 7
Right eye: 7 – 6

I was surprised that it’s my right eye seeing the left 7 and my left eye seeing the right 7.

I doubt insurance companies will use this as an excuse for anything, though, because you can’t use peripheral vision on a driver’s test. It is officially considered irrelevant. They’d make you turn your head completely whenever looking left or right even if you could see through the back of your own skull. The examiner’s don’t care about differences in visual acuity except for whether or not you have to wear glasses.

Then again, these are insurance companies were talking about here. What was I thinking?

How far from the screen should we be and what size should the numbers be? Maybe it would be more effective if the numbers were random, so it takes prediction out of it. Okay, criticism of test done…(sorry) up to 10 are readable I think.

I think you’re right about the test parameters @Keep_on_running.

This particular test has few constants. I didn’t want to confuse the issue with monitor resolutions/sizes… you know. I’m viewing from about 2 feet on a Mac 23” Cinema Display set for 1680×1050.

Now if I really concentrate, I can see flashes of outer numbers here and there. But if I see a 13 flash for a second, that doesn’t mean that I ever saw the 12 or 11 or anything else. It’s odd to me… like blind spots quickly fading in and out.

Hmm…yeah I think it’s quite hard to accurately measure something like this. If you can make out the numbers on either side without taking your focus away from 0 you have peripheral vision.

I understand what you mean, in that there may not be continuous panoramic reading of the numbers, but some “popping” in and out of your mental view, which I would assume is normal. The relationship between the eye and brain is so interesting to study. :P

I find it difficult to take this test because as soon as I’m even remotely aware of other numbers outside of the zero the zero disappears from my vision. Even when I become aware of remote shapes the zero vanishes from my sight, and it doesn’t matter which eye/s I use either. My answer is 0, ziltch, no numbers at all.

My peripheral vision on that test embarrassingly sucks… about a 5—7 with flashes of other numbers coming in and out and being able to see the point on the 7 on the right 17.

When I take the other peripheral vision tests, though, I usually excel. One other peripheral vision test is to hold a red marker-like object in your hand with your arm outstretched in front of you, parallel to the ground, keeping your eyes staring at a spot ahead of you past the marker. Then, move your arm, still outstretched, to your side and stop when the marker disappears out of the side range of your vision. Most people can see just under 180 degrees of range.

@linguaphile my range of peripheral vision is about 90 degrees, mostly on the right, due to being blind in one eye. But the range where I can read a number or letter is far smaller than the range where I can see a moving marker.

I wonder if it’s really the eyes, or if it’s how well I can process information vs other people.

I’m a terribly slow reader, having to scan each line multiple times, and often I catch myself reading backwards from right to left.

I agree with your test @linguaphile being more appropriate for real world experience. 170 degree is about right for me… as I am aware of everything on the sides. Seeing detail is another challenge. I might see the giant bird in the corner of my vision before it swoops down to steal my children… but I couldn’t tell you what kind of bird it is.

True… the test on this thread seems to test peripheral detail identification more than range, while the red-marker test identifies range, but not detail. Maybe that accounts for the different types of tests?

The peripheral vision test I was given by my optician showed green lights of various intensities appearing in random positions on a black background. All I was asked to do was click a button when I saw the flash. My peripheral vision is useless at identifying what it sees and I don’t think I am unusual in that. The eye reads a line of text through little saccadic movements. I don’t think many people could read a line of text if their eye stayed completely still.

Uptil 7 on the right, and 8 to my left.