Have you seen these articles that vary in the type of assessments used (direct observation to automated)?

Glen T. Prusky , Nazia M. Alam , Steven Beekman and Robert M. Douglas , Rapid Quantification of Adult and Developing Mouse Spatial Vision Using a Virtual Optomotor System Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. December 2004 vol. 45 no. 12 4611-4616

Abdeljalil J1, Hamid M, Abdel-Mouttalib O, Stéphane R, Raymond R, Johan A, José S, Pierre C, Serge P. The optomotor response: a robust first-line visual screening method for mice. Vision Res. 2005 May;45(11):1439-46.

Kretschmer F, Kretschmer V, Kunze VP, Kretzberg J (2013) OMR-Arena: Automated Measurement and Stimulation System to Determine Mouse Visual Thresholds Based on Optomotor Responses. PLoS ONE 8(11): e78058.

http://www.iovs.org/content/45/12/4611.short

http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0042698905000052/1-s2.0-S0042698905000052-main.pdf?_tid=d6a23fb8-6935-11e4-8d9a-00000aacb35e&acdnat=1415664248_cc51ff2eaa2c29d0612652b1ab3dc4b3

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0078058

Dear Mr. Bassi,

Thank for the interesting articles and their links!

Julie

I suggest that you look at the "running mouse" approach.  See:

Naarendorp, F., Esdaille, T. M., Banden, S. M., Andrews-Labenski, J., Gross, O. P., & Pugh, E. N. (2010). Dark Light, Rod Saturation, and the Absolute and Incremental Sensitivity of Mouse Cone Vision. Journal of Neuroscience, 30(37): 12495–12507.

This is a really clever approach that uses innate mouse behaviour that you do not need to initiate (i.e. put the animal in the apparatus).  It has advantages over the optomotor approach, including producing much lower measured sensitivites to threshold stimuli.

Thank you Mr. Woods, I will look into this methodology, it looks very informative.

Regards Julie