Hoover --
Please post this "Author's Query" on CVNET. Thanks.
-- Scott.
AUTHOR'S QUERY:
I am presenting a poster at ARVO next month comparing the performance
of candidates for "public safety" jobs (Police, Fireman, Prison Guard, etc.)
who FAILED initial color vision screening (using commercial Ishihara-type
lantern slide targets) on D-15 and FM-100 Hue tests.
The use of the 100-Hue test as a "backup" for the screening slide is
mandated by New York State. The passing cutoff value is a total corrected error
score with either eye (that is to say, with the better eye) of 124 or less.
I am looking for any information, in citation oranecdote, as to
the reasons or justification for choosing 124 as the cut-off value. Calls
to the New York State civil service commission and the legislature have
yielded only the vague reminiscence that a cutoff of 120 was originally
suggested by Farnsworth himself, and that some years later, he suggested
that the value of 124 be used instead.
Farnsworth did publish some data linking the Farnsworth Lantern
to actual job performance. I am also aware of some data linking D-15
scores with job performance, but I am not aware of any such data linking
FM 100-Hue scores with job performance, other than the "color industry"
tasks (such as matching dye-lots, etc.) for which it was supposedly devised.
Since the adoption of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the
burden of proof that a priori job disqualifications based on physical
handicaps are represent failures to meet "Bona Fide Occupational
Qualifications" is placed squarely on the employer. Recent court
decisions have clearly shown that "Because Farnsworth Said So" will
no longer be considered adequate justification for the adoption of
a particular color vision test, or a particular performance criterion
level on such a test.
Any relevant information will be greatly appreciated.
Scott E. Brodie, M.D., Ph.D.
Department of Ophthalmology
Box 1183
Mount Sinai School of Medicine
New York, NY 10029
(212) 241-6240