Objective: Determine the effects of display viewing distance on both the visual and musculoskeletal systems while the text height is held constant across viewing distances. Background: The distance from the eyes to a computer display may affect visual and neck comfort. If the angular size of the characters remains the same, it is recommended that the display be placed at a farther viewing distance (e.g., 70—100 cm). However, in common usage, the character sizes are not adjusted based on viewing distance. Method: Participants under the age of 35 years (N = 24) performed visually demanding tasks using a computer display for 2 hr each at three viewing distances (mean: 52.4, 73.0, and 85.3 cm) while torso and head posture were tracked. At the end of each task, eye accommodation was measured and symptoms were recorded. Results: The near distance was associated with significantly less blurred vision, less dry or irritated eyes, less headache, and improved convergence recovery when compared with the middle and far distances. Participants moved their torsos and heads closer to the monitor at the far distance. Conclusion: If the computer screen character sizes are close to the limits of visual acuity, it is recommended that the computer monitor be positioned between the near (52 cm) and middle (73 cm) distance from the eyes. Application: The location of a computer display should take into account the size of the characters on the screen and the visual acuity of the user.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Atchison, D.A., Claydon, C.A., & Irwin, S.E. (1994). Amplitude of accommodation for different head positions and different directions of eye gaze. Optometry and Vision Science, 71, 339-345.
2.
Burgess-Limerick, R., Plooy, A., &Ankrum, D.R.T. (1998). The effect of imposed and self-selected computer monitor height on posture and gaze angle. Clinical Biomechanics , 13, 584-592.
3.
Cheong, A.C., Lovie-Kitchin, J.E., & Bowers, A.R. (2002). Determining magnification for reading with low vision. Clinical and Experimental Optometry, 85, 229-237.
4.
Daum, K.M., Clore, K.A., Simms, S.S., Vesely, J.W., Wilczek, D.D., Spittle, B.M., et al. (2004). Productivity associated with visual status of computer users. Optometry, 75, 449-453.
5.
Hagberg, M., & Rempel, D. (1997). Work-related disorders and the operation of computer VDT's. In M. Helander, T. K. Landauer, & P. Prabhu (Eds.), Handbook of human-computer interaction (2nd ed., pp. 1415-1430). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
6.
Hagberg, M., & Sundelin, G. (1986). Discomfort and load on the upper trapezius muscle when operating a wordprocessor. Ergonomics, 29, 1637-1645.
7.
Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (1988 ). American national standard for human factors engineering of visual display terminal workstations (ANSI/HFS Standard No. 100-1988). Santa Monica, CA: Author.
8.
Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (2002 ). Human factors engineering of computer workstations: Draft standard for trial use (Rep. No. BSR/HFES 100). Santa Monica, CA: Author.
9.
Jaschinski, W. (2002). The proximity-fixation-disparity curve and the preferred viewing distance at a visual display as an indicator of near vision fatigue. Optometry and Vision Science, 79, 158-69.
10.
Jaschinski, W., & Heuer, H. (2004). Vision and eyes. In N. J. Delleman, C. M. Haslegrave, & D. B. Chaffin (Eds.), Working postures and movements: Tools for evaluation and engineering (pp. 73-86). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
11.
Jaschinski-Kruza, W. (1988). Visual strain during VDU work: The effect of viewing distance and dark focus. Ergonomics, 31, 1449-1465.
12.
Jaschinski-Kruza, W. (1990). On the preferred viewing distances to screen and document at VDU workplaces. Ergonomics, 33, 1055-1063.
13.
Jaschinski-Kruza, W. (1991). Eyestrain in VDU users: Viewing distance and the resting position of ocular muscles. Human Factors, 33, 69-83.
14.
Legge, G.E., Pelli, D.G., Rubin, G.S., & Schleske, M.M. (1985). Psychophysics of readingI. Normal vision. Vision Research, 25, 239-252.
15.
Legge, G.E., Rubin, G.S., Pelli, D.G., & Schleske, M.M. (1985). Psychophysics of reading: II. Low vision. Vision Research, 25, 253-265.
16.
Lovie-Kitchin, J.E., & Woo, G.C. (1987). Effect of magnification and field of view on reading speed using a CCTV. In G. C. Woo (Ed.), Low vision: Principles and application (pp. 308-322). New York: Springer-Verlag.
17.
Owens, D.A. (1984). The resting state of the eyes. American Scientist, 72, 378-387.
18.
Owens, D.A., & Wolf-Kelly, K. (1987). Near work, visual fatigue, and variations of oculomotor tonus. Investigative Ophthalmology and Vision Science, 28, 743-749.
19.
Saito, S., Miyao, M., Kondo, T., Sakakibara, H., & Toyoshima, H. (1997). Ergonomic evaluation of working posture of VDT operation using personal computer with flat panel. Industrial Health, 35, 264-270.
20.
Seghers, J., Jochem, A., & Spaepen, A. (2003). Posture, muscle activity and muscle fatigue in prolonged VDT work at different screen height settings. Ergonomics , 46, 714-730.
21.
Sheedy, J.E., Hayes, J.R., & Engle, J. (2003). Is all asthenopia the same?Optometry and Vision Science, 80, 732-739.
Sommerich, C.M., Joines, S.M.B., & Psihogios, J.P. (2001). Effect of computer monitor viewing angle and related factors on strain, performance, and preference outcomes . Human Factors, 43, 39-55.
24.
Turville, K.L., Psihogios, J.P., Ulmer, T.R., & Mirka, G.A. (1998). The effect of video display terminal height on the operator: A comparison of the 15 degree and 40 degree recommendations . Applied Ergonomics, 29, 239-246.
25.
Villaneuva, M.B., Sotoyama, M., Jonai, H., Takeuchi, Y., & Saito, S. (1996). Adjustments of posture and viewing parameters of the eye to changes in the screen height of the visual display terminal . Ergonomics, 39, 933-945.
26.
Whittaker, S.G., & Lovie-Kitchin, J. (1993). Visual requirements for reading. Optometry and Vision Science, 70, 54-65.
27.
Yager, D., Aquilante, K., & Plass, R. (1998). High and low luminance letters, acuity reserve, and font effects on reading speed. Vision Research, 38, 2527-2531.
