To evaluate the reliability of binocular vision measurements by phorometry. 90 students volunteered to participate in this study. 25 subjects were males, and 65 were females, they ranged in ages from 21 to 30 years. All subjects had normal ocular and systematic health, and all of them had at least 1.0 visual acuity with their best correction. At negative relative convergence(NRC) measurement in distance, the percentage of subjects is included in expected value(blur point/break point/recovery point) was 78%/61%/67%, divergence excess(DE) was 9%/31%/33%, and divergence insufficience(DI) was 13%/8%/9%, respectively. And positive relative convergence(PRC) measurement, includes expected value was 20%/46%/39%, convergence excess(CE) was 22%/14%/16%, and convergence insufficience(CI) was 35%/40%/45%. AC/A ratios of 42 subjects were normal. 38 were low, and the rest of them high. A low AC/A ratio is usually the result of a small vergence response in relation to accommodation. Negative relative convergence(NRC) at near, includes expected value was 26%/29%/44%, divergence excess(DE) was 61%/33%/24%, and divergence insufficience(DI) was 3%/38%/32%. And PRC at near, includes expected value was 33%/40%/31%, convergence excess(CE) was 61%/23%/42%, and convergence insufficience(CI) was 6%/37%/27%. For the near point of convergence(NPC) test, 58% of their subjects had a break of ${leq}8cm$ with the accommodative target. In case of NRA(PRA) measurement, the expected value was 41%(33%). Accommodative insufficiency (AI) was 33%(43%), and accommodative excess(AE) was 26%(24%), respectively. AE was related to respectively low values of NRA. AI and CE are associated with high value of NRA, and the dysfunction of convergence excess combined with AE was related to a normal-high values of NRA. PRA in AI was related to a low value, wheres the dysfunction are associated with high values of PRA.