Dynamic visual acuity: what 43 studies measure in athletes

In brief. In the 43 studies analyzed, dynamic visual acuity refers to two measurements: reading a moving target, or reading a fixed target while the head turns. Only the second has well-documented reliability in athletes. Athletes often do better than non-athletes, with no established link to playing level. Updated November 3, 2026.

Hello to you, the movement professional,

A small circle with a gap, the Landolt ring, races across a screen, and you have to say which side the gap opens on. The baseball players tested by Uchida's team at Waseda University did better than non-athletes as long as their eyes could follow the ring. With gaze locked on a fixed point, the difference disappeared (Uchida et al., 2012). For the authors, this advantage came mainly from the way the eyes accompanied the ring, rather than from a better perception of the image sliding across the retina.

Your athlete takes a "dynamic visual acuity" test: depending on the device, they will track a letter crossing the screen or read a still letter while turning the head at 150 degrees per second, and both scores will carry the same name. Some of these tests have known reliability, others do not, and none has shown that it predicts match performance. What, then, is the number you write down worth?

Dynamic visual acuity: two tests under one name

In the first family, the head stays still and the target moves. The aim is to find the highest speed at which the athlete can still read the gap, in degrees per second (Rouse et al., 1988; Ishigaki and Miyao, 1993), or the smallest target that can be read at a fixed speed. The eye then works in smooth pursuit to keep the image at the center of the retina, with catch-up saccades. In 23 university baseball players, the best scores went with smoother pursuit and fewer backward saccades (Palidis et al., 2017), which the article on the batter's pursuit and saccades details.

In the second, the target is fixed and the head turns, between 150 and 200 degrees per second depending on the protocol. Acuity with the head still and with the head moving is compared in logMAR, the logarithm of the smallest readable angle: the lower the number, the smaller the letter read. The loss between the two mainly informs on the vestibulo-ocular reflex, detailed in the article on keeping the gaze stable when everything moves. Many of these studies come from tracking head impacts, outside the scope of this article: we keep only the measurements of healthy athletes. When an assessment reports a "dynamic visual acuity," which of the two did it record?

Reliability of the dynamic visual acuity test from one session to the next

The head-moving version is the best documented. In 50 American football players tested twice over two weeks, the intraclass correlation coefficient, which tells whether each person keeps their place in the group, reaches 0.770 for horizontal rotation and 0.725 for vertical (Kaufman et al., 2014). Below 0.16 logMAR horizontally and 0.21 vertically, that is more than a line and a half of a chart where each line is worth 0.1, a variation may come down to measurement noise. The gaze stabilization test (the maximum head speed at which the letter stays readable) repeats less well.

Twenty minutes of exertion do not change the acuity loss of 28 university athletes (Patterson et al., 2017), whereas a high-intensity intermittent running test degrades it in 37 rugby and wrestling athletes, in a case series without a control group (Jasinovic et al., 2021).

In 60 recreational athletes, four tests of vestibular function and vision repeat very well while barely correlating with each other: each measures something different (Heick et al., 2017). On the moving-target side, reliability is rarely published, and a review was already calling in 2011 for a standardized test: "The development of a standardized dynamic visual acuity test is needed" (Zimmerman et al., 2011).

Normative values of dynamic visual acuity in athletes

Tested at the start of the season at 150 degrees per second, 67 American football players go from -0.232 logMAR with the head still to -0.007 in horizontal rotation and 0.0845 in vertical rotation (Marquez et al., 2017). In 124 Division I university athletes, the median with the head moving is 0 logMAR, with no difference between men and women (Quintana et al., 2020). In 22 active mixed martial arts fighters, the loss exceeds normal values, and the authors call for caution for lack of a control group (Landers et al., 2017). In Marquez as in Landers, the loss is greater in vertical rotation.

A norm depends on the device and the imposed speed as much as on the population: that of a university American football player does not automatically apply to a 15-year-old tennis player, and two teams consider useful a baseline measurement specific to each athlete, which then serves as the reference (Marquez et al., 2017; Brancaleone et al., 2025).

Static acuity and dynamic acuity: a moderate link, not an equivalence

In 40 professional soccer players, dynamic acuity moderately tracks the static acuity of each eye (r = 0.524 and 0.553), and it is lower in those whose distance depth perception is poorer or whose astigmatism is more marked (Jorge and Jorge, 2024), a point taken up in the athlete's binocular vision. In 55 professionals in soccer, basketball and water polo, the link between the two acuities changes with the contrast of the target (Quevedo-Junyent and Argilés, 2024). With comparable static acuity and refraction, 15 athletes nevertheless read a target at 30 degrees per second better than a control group (Yee et al., 2021).

Dynamic acuity varies neither with vision correction in 73 young soft tennis players (Chang et al., 2015), nor with tinted lenses (Kohmura et al., 2013). "Kinetic" acuity, measured on a target that approaches, would be impossible to predict from static acuity according to a review from Juntendo University (Sawaki et al., 2022), whereas a study from the same university finds them strongly correlated (r = 0.75) in 106 participants (Kudo et al., 2021). Static acuity explains part of dynamic acuity, without replacing it.

Athletes versus non-athletes: a frequent advantage, rarely linked to playing level

The advantage over non-athletes comes back in most comparisons, and almost always fades between athletes: no difference between three levels in 102 professional baseball players (Hoshina et al., 2013), none between elite and sub-elite water polo according to a truncated abstract (Quevedo-Junyent et al., 2011), and novice clay target shooters do better than experienced ones (Abernethy and Neal, 1999). Millslagle's (2000) experienced softball players are the exception.

For Uchida's team, the advantage comes from eye tracking, faster and earlier in players (Uchida et al., 2013); in Yee, however, it persists at equal pursuit gain, without static acuity explaining it. The task matters too: on a random trajectory, Mitchell's athletes read better standing and walking than seated whereas the active students read worse, and the difference disappears on a horizontal trajectory (Mitchell et al., 2026). None of these comparisons says whether sport builds this acuity or retains those who already have it.

Training dynamic visual acuity: the measurement improves, the field is not measured

Three trials report increased dynamic acuity after four to six weeks, two of them with a slideshow test of unknown reliability, impossible to compare with Kaufman's minimal detectable change. The only double-blind placebo-controlled trial finds no difference, despite effect sizes of at least 0.5 on four measures including dynamic acuity (Shekar et al., 2021). No trial links dynamic acuity to play. The "dynamic vision" of Liu et al. (2020), made of strobe and timing, changes neither the visuomotor battery nor the game statistics: a program's name does not say which measurement it improves. Modulated lighting has its own article, on the athlete's peripheral vision.

Links between the studies

Hodges et al. (2021) place dynamic acuity among general skills, detached from the sporting context, in a field with often discordant results. Stine et al. (1982) already judged the two studies cited in favor of a transfer to performance to be poorly designed. Two studies declare a conflict of interest: the corresponding author of Yee 2021 co-invented the measurement software used, not commercialized at the time, and two authors of Rodrigues 2025 are linked to the company that sells the lighting tested.

What a dynamic acuity score does not allow you to claim

Established, on modest samples: the head-moving test keeps the athletes' ranking from one session to the next, with noise of 0.16 to 0.21 logMAR; acuity drops when the head turns fast, especially in vertical rotation; athletes often read a moving target better than non-athletes. Debated: the share of selection and training in this advantage, the role of pursuit, the effect of very intense exertion, that of programs (positive versus a control without placebo, null versus placebo). Extrapolation: that a better dynamic acuity makes a better player, when it does not even separate three levels of professional baseball players.

The most favorable idea can be tested: take 200 professional players from the same sport, measured at the start of the season with a head-moving test and a moving-target test of known reliability. If, at equal position, neither measurement predicts the season's game statistics, dynamic visual acuity no longer holds up as a performance marker in that sport.

Blur in motion, dizziness: the ophthalmologist before the test

In 147 professional soccer players, only a quarter of those who needed a correction to play wore it, and forwards, more often myopic, had the lowest dynamic acuity (Jorge and Fernandes, 2019). If your athlete reports double vision, blur that persists, headaches during exertion or dizziness, visual training waits. They first see an ophthalmologist, then an orthoptist in France, or an optometrist in Switzerland or the United States. LabO RNP is neither medical nor paramedical, and is added as a complement to a care pathway, never in its place. LabO RNP works with optometrists; the curriculum was built with them.

Reading in motion: dynamic acuity in the sensorimotor loop

The eyes are an entry point: LabO RNP teaches movement professionals the sensory aspects of movement and the whole sensorimotor loop, what the athlete perceives and what they do with it. In Koide, the athletic group reads better with the head rotating and also stands better during that rotation, a link between gaze and postural control described without an established cause. The oculomotor exercises in the warm-up have their article, and the map of the evidence in sports vision places dynamic acuity among the other visual functions.

The dynamic visual acuity test in four answers

What is dynamic visual acuity?

The ability to read a fine detail in motion. Studies measure it in two ways: a target that moves in front of a still head, or a fixed target read while the head turns. The first mainly engages smooth pursuit, the second mainly the vestibulo-ocular reflex.

How do you measure an athlete's dynamic visual acuity?

The head-moving version, between 150 and 200 degrees per second, has published reliability in 50 American football players: below 0.16 logMAR horizontally and 0.21 vertically, a difference may be measurement noise (Kaufman et al., 2014). Moving-target tests vary from one study to another and rarely publish their reliability.

Can dynamic visual acuity be improved through training?

Three trials report a gain after four to six weeks of oculomotor exercises or modulated lighting (Minoonejad et al., 2019; Altuncu and Aras Bayram, 2024; Rodrigues et al., 2025). The only double-blind trial, in 32 baseball and softball players, finds no difference from a placebo (Shekar et al., 2021). None measures play.

Is a visual assessment needed before testing or training dynamic acuity?

Yes, as soon as double vision, persistent blur, headaches during exertion or dizziness appear: ophthalmologist first, then orthoptist in France or optometrist in Switzerland and the United States. LabO RNP is neither medical nor paramedical, and is added as a complement to a care pathway, never in its place.

Before comparing two dynamic visual acuity scores, check that they come from the same test and that the difference exceeds the noise of the measurement.

👉 I want to understand what my athlete sees when their head moves.

By the LabO RNP team

Method. Selection of November 3, 2026 from the LabO RNP inventory of studies on athlete vision: 50 studies identified, 7 excluded (follow-up after a head impact, no abstract or data, unreviewed work, other measurement, duplicate), 43 analyzed (33 measurement or comparison studies, 5 reviews, 5 trials). PMIDs verified on PubMed the same day; Altuncu 2024 and Liu 2020, absent from PubMed, are cited by their DOI verified with Crossref.

Sources

• Abernethy B, Neal RJ (1999). Visual characteristics of clay target shooters. J Sci Med Sport, 2(1), 1-19. PMID 10331472. doi:10.1016/s1440-2440(99)80180-7

• Altuncu G, Aras Bayram G (2024). The Effect of Oculomotor Exercises With Gaze Stabilization on Hand-Eye Coordination and Reaction Time in Table Tennis Athletes. Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 35(1), 36-45. No PMID. doi:10.17644/sbd.1432708

• Brancaleone MP, Boucher LC, Yang J, Merfeld D, Onate JA (2025). Comparing dynamic visual acuity between athletes who are deaf or hard-of-hearing and athletes who are hearing. J Am Coll Health, 73(1), 27-30. PMID 37053591. doi:10.1080/07448481.2023.2198018

• Chang ST, Liu YH, Lee JS, See LC (2015). Comparing sports vision among three groups of soft tennis adolescent athletes: Normal vision, refractive errors with and without correction. Indian J Ophthalmol, 63(9), 716-21. PMID 26632127. doi:10.4103/0301-4738.170974

• Filippini T, Kittelson A, Wagner A, Moody V, Schubert M, Loyd B (2025). Professional baseball players demonstrate superior dynamic visual acuity and differences in vestibulo-ocular reflex performance, compared to similarly aged healthy controls. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil, 18(1), 15. PMID 41345978. doi:10.1186/s13102-025-01405-x

• Fogt JS, Fogt N (2023). Studies of Vision in Cricket-A Narrative Review. Vision (Basel), 7(3). PMID 37756131. doi:10.3390/vision7030057

• Heick JD, Bay C, Dompier TP, Valovich McLeod TC (2017). Relationships among common vision and vestibular tests in healthy recreational athletes. Int J Sports Phys Ther, 12(4), 581-591. PMID 28900564.

• Hodges NJ, Wyder-Hodge PA, Hetherington S, Baker J, Besler Z, Spering M (2021). Topical Review: Perceptual-cognitive Skills, Methods, and Skill-based Comparisons in Interceptive Sports. Optom Vis Sci, 98(7), 681-695. PMID 34328450. doi:10.1097/OPX.0000000000001727

• Hoshina K, Tagami Y, Mimura O, Edagawa H, Matsubara M, Nakayama T (2013). A study of static, kinetic, and dynamic visual acuity in 102 Japanese professional baseball players. Clin Ophthalmol, 7, 627-32. PMID 23569356. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S41047

• Ishigaki H, Miyao M (1993). Differences in dynamic visual acuity between athletes and nonathletes. Percept Mot Skills, 77(3 Pt 1), 835-9. PMID 8284163. doi:10.2466/pms.1993.77.3.835

• Jasinovic T, Burma JS, Cameron B, Lun V, van Rassel CR, Sutter B, Wiley JP, Schneider KJ (2021). The effect of high-intensity physical exertion on measures of cervical spine, vestibular/ocular-motor screening, and vestibulo-ocular reflex function in university level collision and combative sport athletes. Phys Ther Sport, 51, 36-44. PMID 34225057. doi:10.1016/j.ptsp.2021.06.008

• Jorge J, Fernandes P (2019). Static and dynamic visual acuity and refractive errors in elite football players. Clin Exp Optom, 102(1), 51-56. PMID 30054950. doi:10.1111/cxo.12812

• Jorge J, Jorge JP (2024). Relationship between dynamic visual acuity and static visual acuity, refractive error, and binocular vision in elite soccer players. Clin Exp Optom, 107(8), 820-825. PMID 38245910. doi:10.1080/08164622.2024.2301981

• Kaufman DR, Puckett MJ, Smith MJ, Wilson KS, Cheema R, Landers MR (2014). Test-retest reliability and responsiveness of gaze stability and dynamic visual acuity in high school and college football players. Phys Ther Sport, 15(3), 181-8. PMID 24295546. doi:10.1016/j.ptsp.2013.10.002

• Kelly R, Roberts JW (2021). Investigation into the dynamic visual acuity of skilled cricketers using a continuous motion task. J Sports Med Phys Fitness, 61(5), 753-759. PMID 33146492. doi:10.23736/S0022-4707.20.11321-5

• Kohmura Y, Murakami S, Aoki K (2013). Effect of yellow-tinted lenses on visual attributes related to sports activities. J Hum Kinet, 36, 27-36. PMID 23717352. doi:10.2478/hukin-2013-0003

• Koide Y, Ueki Y, Asai Y, Morimoto H, Asai H, Johnson EG, Lohman EB, Sakuma E, Mizutani J, Ueki T, Wada I (2019). Differences in postural stability and dynamic visual acuity among healthy young adults in relation to sports activity: a cross sectional study. J Phys Ther Sci, 31(1), 53-56. PMID 30774205. doi:10.1589/jpts.31.53

• Kudo D, Hiratsuka Y, Nakamura M, Uchida Y, Ono S, Murakami A (2021). Optimal methods for estimating sports vision in kendo athletes. Sci Rep, 11(1), 315. PMID 33431981. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-79534-1

• Landers MR, Donatelli R, Nash J, Bascharon R (2017). Evidence of dynamic visual acuity impairment in asymptomatic mixed martial arts fighters. Concussion, 2(3), CNC41. PMID 30202582. doi:10.2217/cnc-2016-0032

• Liu S, Ferris LM, Hilbig S, Asamoa E, LaRue JL, Lyon D, Connolly K, Port N, Appelbaum LG (2020). Dynamic vision training transfers positively to batting practice performance among collegiate baseball batters. Psychol Sport Exerc, 51, 101759. No PMID. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2020.101759 (bioRxiv preprint : doi:10.1101/2020.02.12.945824)

• Lüder A, Andexer V, Witte K, Böckelmann I (2011). [Dynamic vision of sportsmen with different requirement profiles for the visual apparatus]. Klin Monbl Augenheilkd, 228(12), 1103-7. PMID 21847784. doi:10.1055/s-0031-1273401

• Marquez C, Lininger M, Raab S (2017). Establishing normative change values in visual acuity loss during the dynamic visual acuity test. Int J Sports Phys Ther, 12(2), 227-232. PMID 28515977.

• Massingale S, Alexander A, Gerkin R, Leddon C, McQueary E, Allred RC, Pardini JE (2019). Gaze stability in the elite athlete: A normative observational study. J Vestib Res, 29(5), 221-228. PMID 31476191. doi:10.3233/VES-190678

• Millslagle DG (2000). Dynamic visual acuity and coincidence-anticipation timing by experienced and inexperienced women players of fast pitch softball. Percept Mot Skills, 90(2), 498-504. PMID 10833746. doi:10.2466/pms.2000.90.2.498

• Minoonejad H, Barati AH, Naderifar H, Heidari B, Kazemi AS, Lashay A (2019). Effect of four weeks of ocular-motor exercises on dynamic visual acuity and stability limit of female basketball players. Gait Posture, 73, 286-290. PMID 31398634. doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2019.06.022

• Mitchell KM, Dalton KN, Cinelli ME (2026). Sport Experience and Task Complexity Modulate Dynamic Visual Acuity During Different Balance and Physical Exertion Demands. Percept Mot Skills, , 315125261432828. PMID 41774820. doi:10.1177/00315125261432828

• Muiños M, Ballesteros S (2015). Sports can protect dynamic visual acuity from aging: A study with young and older judo and karate martial arts athletes. Atten Percept Psychophys, 77(6), 2061-73. PMID 25893472. doi:10.3758/s13414-015-0901-x

• Nakajima Y, Kaga K, Takekoshi H, Sakuraba K (2012). Evaluation of vestibular and dynamic visual acuity in adults with congenital deafness. Percept Mot Skills, 115(2), 503-11. PMID 23265013. doi:10.2466/15.06.25.PMS.115.5.503-511

• Palidis DJ, Wyder-Hodge PA, Fooken J, Spering M (2017). Distinct eye movement patterns enhance dynamic visual acuity. PLoS One, 12(2), e0172061. PMID 28187157. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0172061

• Patterson JN, Murphy AM, Honaker JA (2017). Examining Effects of Physical Exertion on the Dynamic Visual Acuity Test in Collegiate Athletes. J Am Acad Audiol, 28(1), 36-45. PMID 28054910. doi:10.3766/jaaa.15110

• Quevedo-Junyent L, Aznar-Casanova JA, Merindano-Encina D, Cardona G, Solé-Fortó J (2011). Comparison of dynamic visual acuity between water polo players and sedentary students. Res Q Exerc Sport, 82(4), 644-51. PMID 22276406. doi:10.1080/02701367.2011.10599801

• Quevedo-Junyent L, Argilés M (2024). Influence of trajectory and contrast on dynamic visual acuity in elite team sports players. Perception, 53(7), 437-449. PMID 38646722. doi:10.1177/03010066241248077

• Quintana C, Heebner NR, Olson AD, Abt JP, Hoch MC (2020). Sport-specific differences in dynamic visual acuity and gaze stabilization in division-I collegiate athletes. J Vestib Res, 30(4), 249-257. PMID 32925127. doi:10.3233/VES-200710

• Rodrigues P, Woodburn J, Bond AJ, Stockman A, Vera J (2025). Light-based manipulation of visual processing speed during soccer-specific training has a positive impact on visual and visuomotor abilities in professional soccer players. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt, 45(2), 504-513. PMID 39564808. doi:10.1111/opo.13423

• Rouse MW, DeLand P, Christian R, Hawley J (1988). A comparison study of dynamic visual acuity between athletes and nonathletes. J Am Optom Assoc, 59(12), 946-50. PMID 3209790.

• Sawaki K, Kohmura Y, Aoki K, Nakamura M, Murakami S, Suzuki Y (2022). Sports and Kinetic Visual Acuity. Juntendo Iji Zasshi, 68(4), 387-392. PMID 39021421. doi:10.14789/jmj.JMJ22-0019-R

• Shekar SU, Erickson GB, Horn F, Hayes JR, Cooper S (2021). Efficacy of a Digital Sports Vision Training Program for Improving Visual Abilities in Collegiate Baseball and Softball Athletes. Optom Vis Sci, 98(7), 815-825. PMID 34285177. doi:10.1097/OPX.0000000000001740

• Stine CD, Arterburn MR, Stern NS (1982). Vision and sports: a review of the literature. J Am Optom Assoc, 53(8), 627-33. PMID 7130603.

• Sánchez-Tena MÁ, Rodríguez-Alonso X, Martinez-Perez C, Tornero-Aguilera JF, Clemente-Suárez VJ, Sanchez-Ramos C, Alvarez-Peregrina C (2023). Comparison of Visual Skills between Federated and Non-Federated Athletes. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 20(2). PMID 36673806. doi:10.3390/ijerph20021047

• Uchida Y, Kudoh D, Murakami A, Honda M, Kitazawa S (2012). Origins of superior dynamic visual acuity in baseball players: superior eye movements or superior image processing. PLoS One, 7(2), e31530. PMID 22384033. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031530

• Uchida Y, Kudoh D, Higuchi T, Honda M, Kanosue K (2013). Dynamic visual acuity in baseball players is due to superior tracking abilities. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 45(2), 319-25. PMID 22935736. doi:10.1249/MSS.0b013e31826fec97

• Yee A, Thompson B, Irving E, Dalton K (2021). Athletes Demonstrate Superior Dynamic Visual Acuity. Optom Vis Sci, 98(7), 777-782. PMID 34267082. doi:10.1097/OPX.0000000000001734

• Zimmerman AB, Lust KL, Bullimore MA (2011). Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity testing for sports vision. Eye Contact Lens, 37(3), 153-9. PMID 21378574. doi:10.1097/ICL.0b013e31820d12f4