1

Over the past several decades, computer monitors have typically gotten larger, and more specifically wider. Also, it has become (somewhat) more common for people to use an multiple monitors next to each other, or ultra-wide curved monitors like these.

I was wondering, intuitively, whether there wasn't some detrimental effect in bright light and small high-resolution items demanding attention shining at you from relatively large angles.

My question: Is there any research on potential detrimental effects of use of such monitor setups? I mean ophtalmological and neurological effects.

Related, but not about monitor dimensions/viewing angles: Is the blue light emitted by computer monitors deleterious for the human eyes?

einpoklum
  • 518
  • 3
  • 17
  • If so, I would expect to see very high rates of vision problems among computer programmers because most of them use the maximum screen space they can fit on a desk. To my knowledge, that is not the case. Personally, I have a 76 cm (30 in) monitor with a 56 cm (22 in) monitor next to it, and I think you'll find an arrangement like that is very typical for the software industry and by no means the biggest. – Carey Gregory May 01 '21 at 21:35
  • 1
    @CareyGregory wrote "To my knowledge, that is not the case." Do you have evidence or references that support "your knowledge"? Are you an expert in the field? – End Anti-Semitic Hate May 01 '21 at 23:34
  • 1
    @RockPaperLz-MaskitorCasket - No, I have no evidence beyond the anecdote I offered, which is why it was just a comment, not an answer. You shouldn't take it as more than that. – Carey Gregory May 02 '21 at 03:56
  • 1
    A non-expert comment but I seem to recall 30 odd years ago when long-term screen use was becoming common one of the main concerns was keeping your eyes focused on a small focal length / area. I'm not sure if ophthalmologists still consider that valid but if they do there might be an argument that larger setups where you need to move your focus further are actually better. – PeterJ May 03 '21 at 12:21
  • 1
    @PeterJ: I think focal distance is actually a different issue than what I brought up. That is, you never focus on the entire screen, you always focus on a small part of it. The question is more about the non-focused parts, which you are still kind of grasping at in terms of vision. But of course, I may be talking nonsense here. – einpoklum May 03 '21 at 18:36
  • @einpoklum You're not talking nonsense at all! :) What you are doing is making it more clear that there are really questions for 2 different uses: (1) when you need to be aware of content in the periphery, and (2) when you do not. For example, when I'm operating complex equipment, I'm usually in category (1). But when I'm doing something like interacting with StackExchange, I'm usually in category (2). – End Anti-Semitic Hate May 04 '21 at 06:54
  • @RockPaperLz-MaskitorCasket: But even in case 2, having high-resolution items which you instinctively try to make out at the periphery of your vision may theoretically be stressful. – einpoklum May 04 '21 at 08:34
  • @einpoklum It would be an interesting test to run, and we would have to carefully define "stressful". BTW, (most) people can train themselves to use more or less of their periphery vision on demand. For some tasks, I've trained myself to almost completely disregard the periphery, whereas for other tasks I place a lower value on information sent to my brain from my foveae centralis. Like many things, it's a learned skill. – End Anti-Semitic Hate May 11 '21 at 07:04

0 Answers0