| Volume 3, Number 11, Article 6, Pages 710-724 |
doi:10.1167/3.11.6 |
http://journalofvision.org/3/11/6/ |
ISSN 1534-7362 |
Thresholds for stereo-slant discrimination between spatially separated targets are influenced mainly by visual and memory factors but not oculomotor instability
Zhi-Lei Zhang |
Vision Science Group, School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA |
|
Ellen M. Berends |
Vision Science Group, School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA |
|
Clifton M. Schor |
Vision Science Group, School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA |
|
Abstract
Surface-slant variations can be sensed either simultaneously with steady fixation or sequentially with saccadic gaze shifts. Stereo-slant discrimination thresholds are affected by visual, oculomotor, and memory factors. We have investigated the effects of fixation strategy, target separation, and exposure duration on stereo-slant discrimination. With long exposure durations (734 ms), stereo-slant discrimination thresholds measured with simultaneous presentation of test and reference stimuli were lower with gaze shifts than without them when target separations exceeded 4 deg. Above 4-deg target separations, the benefits of improved disparity resolution with foveal gaze shifts outweighed the costs of oculomotor variability associated with saccades. With short exposure durations (167 ms), as target separation increased, stereo-slant discrimination thresholds measured without gaze shifts increased with both sequential and simultaneous stimulus presentations, whereas thresholds with gaze shifts remained constant. This indicates that oculomotor errors are not an important factor in stereo-slant discrimination. In contrast to stereo-slant thresholds, sequential stereo-depth thresholds between two dots, measured with gaze shifts, increased with target separation. Thus, oculomotor error increases with target separation, and it is an important factor in stereo-depth discrimination.
 |
|
History
Received March 28, 2003; published November 24, 2003
Citation
Zhang, Z.-L., Berends, E. M., & Schor, C. M. (2003). Thresholds for stereo-slant discrimination between spatially separated targets are influenced mainly by visual and memory factors but not oculomotor instability.
Journal of Vision, 3(11):6, 710-724,
http://journalofvision.org/3/11/6/,
doi:10.1167/3.11.6.
Keywords
stereopsis, slant discrimination, sequential, simultaneous, gaze shift, oculomotor, visual, memory loss
for related articles by these authors
for papers that cite this paper |
Binocular disparity cues can be used to recover slant
and variations of surface orientation of extended surfaces ( Backus, Banks, van Ee, & Crowell,
1999;
Ogle,
1956;
Rogers & Bradshaw,
1995). When comparing slant of widely separated surface locations, only one
location can be imaged on the fovea at a time and other locations are imaged in
the retinal periphery. Two surface locations can be compared simultaneously with
steady foveal fixation on one location or sequentially with alternate foveal
gaze shifts between the two locations. It is not obvious which of these two
fixation strategies will yield the lowest threshold.
The first goal of this study is to identify the minimum
target separation for which thresholds for slant discrimination are lowered by
gaze shifts between two targets. Prior studies of two-point stereo-depth
discrimination demonstrate that thresholds measured with widely spaced targets
are lower with foveal gaze shifts between targets than during steady fixation on
one target when target separations were greater than approximately 2 deg
( Ogle, 1956).
Do gaze shifts also improve stereo-slant thresholds for widely separated
targets?
It is not obvious whether gaze shifts would lower
thresholds for stereo-slant discrimination measured with widely separated
targets. The threshold is determined by a combination of visual, oculomotor, and
temporal factors. First, memory loss and the usefulness of the gradient of
relative disparity between edges ( Gillam, Flagg & Finlay, 1984) are
influenced by whether the targets are presented simultaneously or sequentially.
Second, disparity resolution is influenced by whether the targets are presented
in the fovea or in the periphery ( McKee,
Welch, Taylor, & Bowne, 1990). Third, the magnitude of oculomotor error
is influenced by the amplitude of saccadic gaze shifts and these motor errors
can contribute to errors of space perception ( Becker,
1972;
Bridgeman & Stark,
1979;
Collewijn, Erkelens, &
Steinman,
1988;
Henson,
1979;
Mack,
1970;
Whipple & Wallach,
1978). The main goal here is to study the influence of these factors on
stereo-slant discrimination. These factors and their influence under different
viewing conditions are discussed extensively in the following section.
Factors Affecting Thresholds for Slant Discrimination
Stereo-slant estimates of a planar surface are based on
horizontal disparity subtended by the surface elements and the location of the
surface relative to the head ( Backus et
al.,
1999;
Ogle, 1950). Here we will refer to
slant about a vertical axis as “slant.” Slant about a vertical axis
can be produced by horizontal magnification of one ocular image (i.e., a
horizontal size ratio [HSR]) between the two retinal images not equal to 1.0.
This produces a horizontal gradient of horizontal disparity between the two
images ( Rogers & Bradshaw,
1993). By itself, the horizontal disparity gradient is ambiguous. The same
horizontal disparity patterns can correspond to many different oculo-centric and
head-centric slants, depending on their distance and azimuth. The horizontal
disparity gradient is scaled for distance and azimuth to recover slant ( Garding, Porrill, Mayhew, & Frisby,
1995).
Information about distance and azimuth can be derived
from either vertical disparity (vertical size ratio [VSR]) or horizontal
gradient of vertical disparity ( Backus
et al.,
1999;
Brenner, Smeets, & Landy,
2001;
Gillam & Lawergren,
1983), or oculomotor correlates of version
( φ) and horizontal vergence
(µ) ( Brenner & van Damme,
1998). Estimates of azimuth based on oculomotor signals use version eye
position and are mainly used when there is little information about vertical
disparities, such as with short-height targets ( Backus et al., 1999). Vertical
disparity was minimized in this study by using short height stimuli.
Disparity Resolution and Retinal Eccentricity
The binocular signal for surface slant stimuli is a
horizontal gradient of relative disparity. The sensitivity to relative disparity
between two points falls off with retinal eccentricity ( Fendick & Westheimer, 1983).
Thresholds vary from 5 arcsec at the fovea to approximately 60 arcsec at 10 deg
retinal eccentricity. At the fovea, thresholds are thought to be limited by the
variance in the response of spatial filters, which is relevant for position
coding. At large retinal eccentricities, thresholds are thought to be limited
by resolution of local sign ( Weymouth,
1958) that is determined by spatial grain of the retina and the cortical
magnification factor ( Burbeck &
Yap, 1990; Levi & Klein,
1990).
The Gradient of Relative Disparity Between Edges of Adjacent Targets
Slant discrimination can be based upon a comparison of
slant estimates at two separate locations. In addition, slant discrimination
between two surfaces can be based on the relative disparities between the edges
of the two surfaces. Sensitivity to these relative disparities falls off as
target separation increases ( Ogle,
1956;
Rady & Ishak, 1955; Shipley & Popp, 1972; Wright, 1951).
The difference between horizontal gradients of
horizontal disparity subtended by the edges of our two surfaces is proportional
to the difference in slant between the two surfaces. This gradient of relative
edge disparities ( Figure 1
and Figure 2) provides a cue for
stereo-slant discrimination that has been shown to increase the accuracy and
reduce response time of super-threshold slant estimation ( Gillam et al., 1984). Slant estimates
are reduced as separation increases vertically or in depth ( Gillam & Blackburn, 1998).
Presumably, separation in time would also impair the use of the gradient of
relative disparities between edges of surfaces by preventing the simultaneous
comparison of disparity at the two separated edges.
Gaze shifts improve resolution of retinal disparity by
imaging targets on the fovea and the horopter where sensitivity to disparity is
the highest ( Badcock & Schor,
1985;
Stevenson, Cormack, &
Schor, 1989); however, they also introduce oculomotor errors from horizontal
vergence and version uncertainty. Oculomotor errors could influence slant
discrimination in several ways. As indicated by Equation 1, the accuracy of registered version
( φ) and horizontal vergence
( µ) during sequential gaze shifts
can limit the accuracy of slant estimates ( Banks & Backus,
1998).  | (1) |
Uncertainty of sensed eye position associated with gaze
shifts increases with saccade amplitude. For example, the thresholds for
detecting changes in separation between the present and a previous direction of
gaze equals 10% of the saccade amplitude ( Becker,
1972;
Bridgeman & Stark,
1979;
Henson,
1979;
Mack,
1970;
Whipple & Wallach,
1978). The error is a combination of undershoots and variability that
increase with saccade amplitude ( Boucher, Groh, & Hughes, 2001).
Horizontal vergence errors also increase with saccade amplitude. Horizontal
vergence errors occur during both vertical and horizontal saccades ( Collewijn et al.,
1988;
Enright, 1989) and they could
elevate sequential stereo-depth thresholds.
Stereo-slant stimuli used in the current study could
minimize the influence of both horizontal vergence and version errors on slant
discrimination thresholds. Horizontal vergence error would not degrade disparity
signals for either simultaneous or sequential stereo-slant estimates because
each slant stimulus contains relative disparities that make up the horizontal
disparity gradient. Horizontal vergence errors would add a constant disparity to
the entire surface but the relative disparities making up the horizontal
disparity gradient and HSR would be unaffected. Horizontal vergence errors would
not add to differences between simultaneously presented disparities because it
is common to binocular images seen simultaneously and it is cancelled in a
presumed differencing process between absolute disparities ( Westheimer, 1979a). Horizontal
vergence errors could introduce small scaling errors of slanted surfaces that
could potentially alter slant magnitudes perceived in sequential presentations
when HSR values were not equal to 1.0. Slant scaling errors of the reference
surface were minimized with our fronto-parallel reference surface (HSR=1.0) that
was presented in the straight-ahead direction. Note that cyclo-vergence during
vertical gaze shifts ( Schor, Maxwell,
& Graf, 2001) could introduce shear disparity but these are very small
disparities for our viewing distance and do not interfere with estimating slant
about a vertical axis.
Horizontal version errors produce uncertainty in
azimuth estimates that could produce sequential stereo-slant errors ( Equation 1). We have reduced the influence of
version errors on slant discrimination by using stimuli that are aligned
vertically in the straight-ahead direction. In a control experiment, we compared
stereo-slant discrimination thresholds measured with gaze shifts between
vertically and horizontally separated targets in order to determine if any
oculomotor error was large enough to influence estimates of azimuth and
stereo-slant.
The difference in stereo-slant discrimination
thresholds measured with and without gaze shifts could also be affected by a
temporal factor (memory loss). Foveal gaze shifts between widely spaced targets
could improve the resolution of their disparities; however, gaze shifts also
introduce time delays between sequential views of fixated targets. The onset
asynchrony between views of sequentially fixated targets can be as brief as 300
ms. The normal latency for a saccade is 200 ms and the duration of the saccade
can be up to 100 ms ( Bahill, Bahill,
Clark, & Stark, 1975). Saccadic gaze shifts are associated with elevated
detection thresholds (saccadic suppression) ( Breitmeyer & Ganz, 1976) that
could elevate stereo thresholds. However, even when time delays between stereo
stimuli are introduced artificially without saccades, and targets are presented
within the foveal area, sequential stereo-depth thresholds are 3 to 4 times
higher than simultaneous stereo-depth thresholds ( Enright,
1991a;
Enright,
1991b;
Kumar & Glaser,
1994;
McKee et al.,
1990;
Westheimer, 1979a). Memory
loss ( Foley, 1976), and possibly temporal
masking for brief stimulus onset asynchronies ( Butler & Westheimer, 1978)
have both been considered as contributing factors to the elevation of the
sequential stereo-depth threshold.
Foveal gaze shifts improve disparity resolution from
peripheral to foveal levels ( McKee et
al., 1990), but gaze shifts could also increase oculomotor errors associated
with saccadic gaze shifts ( Becker,
1972;
Bridgeman & Stark,
1979;
Collewijn et al.,
1988;
Henson,
1979;
Mack,
1970;
Whipple & Wallach,
1978). The influence of visual and oculomotor factors on slant
discrimination thresholds changes with target separation. The current
investigation explores how saccadic gaze shifts affect stereo-slant
discrimination thresholds between spatially separated targets. Slant
discrimination thresholds were measured as a function of vertical separation
between the test and reference patches. We have demonstrated the benefits of
gaze shifts by comparing stereo-slant discrimination between two surfaces viewed
simultaneously for a long duration (734 ms) either with steady fixation on the
reference target or with gaze shifts between targets.
We have also compared thresholds measured with short
durations (167 ms) with targets presented simultaneously with steady fixation
and sequentially with either steady fixation or saccadic gaze shifts between the
two targets. These experiments included different spatial, temporal, and
oculomotor conditions that might influence slant discrimination thresholds. We
found that at large separations, thresholds measured with gaze shifts were lower
than those measured with steady fixation, and that the threshold for sequential
target presentation measured with gaze shifts was independent of target
separation, suggesting that in our experiment, oculomotor errors did not have an
important influence on thresholds for stereo-slant discrimination.
More horizontal version errors would be expected to
accompany horizontal than vertical saccadic gaze shifts. We investigated the
influence of the horizontal version errors associated with saccades by comparing
slant discrimination thresholds for the sequential condition measured with
vertical and horizontal saccades.
Horizontal vergence errors are thought to influence
sequential stereo-depth thresholds ( Westheimer,
1979a). Stereo-depth thresholds
increase with target separation when measured with saccadic gaze shifts between
targets ( Enright,
1991b;
Ogle, 1956). This increase could be
attributed to an increase of horizontal vergence errors with saccade amplitude.
Assuming this interpretation is correct, we compared sequential stereo-depth
with sequential stereo-slant to illustrate that horizontal vergence errors
affect stereo slant and depth estimates differently.
The stimuli were displayed on a 20-in. monochrome
monitor (Monoray Model M20ECD5RE; Clinton Electronics, Loves Park, IL, USA) at
120-Hz non-interlaced frame rate with 1024 by 768 pixel resolution. This monitor
had a fast DP 104 CRT phosphor that decays to 0.1% peak in 0.6 ms with a burn
resistant property. The fast phosphor decay is critical for minimizing the cross
talk between images presented to left and right eyes because we were using the
same screen area with shutter glasses to generate stereograms. Video images were
controlled using Visual Stimulus Generators (VSG) 2/3 graphics card (Cambridge
Research Systems, Kent, England) in a host Pentium computer. The images were
corrected for any screen pincushion and prismatic distortions at the 57.3-cm
test distance using a grid-loom calibration method ( Backus et al., 1999). At that viewing
distance, there are 29 pixels per degree horizontally. All stimuli were viewed
through 120-Hz Ferro-shutter optics (model FE-1 ferroelectric shutter goggle;
Cambridge Research Systems, Kent, England). Each eye viewed stimuli at 60 Hz
with no discernable flicker.
The simulated planes consisted of elliptical patches of
sparse, randomly positioned dots to minimize perspective and texture cues for
surface orientation (e.g., Figure 1). The elliptical
patches had a variable aspect ratio averaging 0.19. Average height was 1.5 deg
and width was 8 deg. A stimulus height of 1.5 deg has been shown to contain few
if any effective vertical disparity cues for providing information about target
distance or azimuth ( Backus et al.,
1999). The 8 deg-stimulus width provided a large enough area to stimulate
slant perception with horizontal disparity information. Each patch contained
about 90 irregularly spaced dots. Sub-pixel resolution was obtained by
anti-aliasing each dot ( Klein, Hu, &
Carney, 1996). Each dot was a luminance Gaussian distribution with a sigma
of 2/3 pixels. The peak luminance was 4.2 cd/m 2 at the screen when
viewed through the Ferro-shutters.
Horizontally slanted stimuli were obtained by applying
a horizontal magnification of one eye’s image. The disparity gradients
were always consistent within a plane rotated about a vertical axis (tilt axis =
0.0 degree). At the 57.3-cm viewing distance for a 6-cm interpupillary distance,
a horizontal size ratio (HSR) of 1.01 corresponds to a slant of approximately 5
deg. Test planes were compared to a fronto-parallel reference plane in the
straight-ahead
position.
Figure 1 . A
stereogram of the dichoptic slant stimulus configuration for test and reference
planes. The bottom dichoptic pair of patches illustrates the reference with
0-deg slant. The top dichoptic pair of patches illustrates the test that was
presented at various slants by varying its horizontal size ratio. Each patch had
an elliptical shape with an 8-deg horizontal visual angle and 1.5-deg vertical
angle filled with sparse randomly positioned dots
Figure 2 shows the
spatial (upper panel) and temporal (lower panel) configuration of the stimuli
used in this experiment. The stimuli contained reference and test planes
separated vertically with the test located above the reference. The fixation
point was at the center of the reference plane. Vertical separation is defined
as the distance between the center of the reference and the center of the test
patches. We refer to this vertical separation as the eccentricity of the test
stimuli. Vertical separations were 2, 4, 8, or 12 deg. In order to reduce the
impact of off-horopter disparities on the sensitivity to stereo-slant stimuli,
the axis of slant was parallel to the empirical vertical horopter of each
subject. The vertical horopter was measured with vertical nonius lines (0.25 deg
long) presented in the midsagittal plane at elevations from 0 to 4 deg above and
below the central fixation target. Standing horizontal disparities between test
and reference surfaces have been shown to produce underestimates of slant
magnitude ( Gillam & Blackburn,
1998). Placement of test and reference targets along the vertical horopter
ensured that there were no standing horizontal disparity differences between
surfaces and that their axes of slant were coplanar.
Figure 2 . Spatial
and temporal configuration of the stimuli. Spatial configuration: the center of
the reference patch was always positioned at the fixation point. The slanted
test surface was placed above the reference at various vertical eccentricities
ranging from 2 to 12 deg. Vertical eccentricity was measured as the distance
between the centers of the two patches. All the surfaces were placed on the
subject's vertical horopter. Temporal configuration. Simultaneous: both appear
at the same time with durations of 167 or 734 ms. Sequential: the reference was
followed by the test; each presented for 167 ms, with a 400-ms inter-stimulus
interval. The subject either made vertical saccadic gaze shifts between test and
reference targets or maintained fixation at the center of the lower reference
target.
Figure 2 (bottom
panel) shows the time course of the stimuli. The reference and the target
stimuli were presented either simultaneously (left panel) or sequentially (right
panel) with an inter-stimulus interval (ISI) of 400 ms. This ISI is longer than
the sum of the latency (200 ms) and maximum duration (100 ms) of saccadic gaze
shifts. Reference and test targets had the same stimulus duration of 167 ms or
734 ms.
The experiment was conducted in complete darkness to
eliminate visibility of the room, edges of the monitor and facial features as
frames of reference. The subject’s head position was fixed by means of a
bite board and headrest to align the eyes with the calibrated view-points.
Procedure and Data Analysis
Stimuli were presented according to the method of
constant stimuli, with a two-alternative forced-choice response procedure. In
each trial, the magnification of the test was selected randomly from 1 of 9
levels, and each level was presented 6 times in a given session. Each stimulus
had a different random dot pattern. Before each trial, subjects monitored the
accuracy of their horizontal vergence by using two vertical nonius markers
located above and below the fixation dot. When the nonius lines appeared
aligned, the subject initiated a trial by pressing a button to replace the
fixation pattern with a short-duration stimulus. Reference (fronto- parallel)
and test patches with varying amounts of slant were presented either
simultaneously or sequentially at various retinal eccentricities with respect to
the fixation spot ( Figure 2). With these two
stimulus presentations, subjects were instructed either to make a saccadic gaze
shift from the center of the reference to the center of the test target in order
to foveate both patches sequentially, or to hold fixation on the center dot of
the lower reference patch. The two stimulus presentations and eye-movement
conditions resulted in four combinations of experimental conditions:
simultaneous presentation without or with a gaze shift, and sequential
presentation without or with a gaze shift. For simplicity, we refer to these
conditions as simultaneous with gaze
shift, simultaneous without gaze shift,
sequential with gaze shift, and
sequential without gaze shift. The
subject’s task was to indicate whether the test plane was slanted left
side farther away than the reference.
Percentage of correct responses from at least six
sessions was plotted as a function of HSR for each experiment condition, and was
fit (maximum likelihood) with a psychometric function (cumulative Gaussian) in
order to estimate a threshold or just-noticeable difference (JND). The JND
equaled the SD of the cumulative Gaussian. The JND is half of the difference
between the values of the independent variable corresponding to 16% and 84% of
correct performance (d' = 1). SEs were estimated by performing Monte-Carlo
simulations of the original data sets (i.e., bootstrap replications). Each
experimental session began with 10-20 practice trials. Three observers (ZZ, CS,
and PI) were tested. PI was naïve as to the purpose of the
experiments.
Experiment 1: Can Gaze Shifts Improve the Stereo-Slant Discrimination Between Spatially Separated Targets?
There are two possible viewing strategies for spatially
separated targets under naturally viewing conditions. Either the targets can be
viewed sequentially in time with a foveal gaze shift between them, or they can
be viewed simultaneously with steady foveal fixation of one target and a
peripheral view of the other target. With small target separations, both surface
locations are near the fovea and thresholds measured with and without gaze
shifts are either equal or the threshold with gaze shifts could be elevated by
oculomotor errors. Ideally, the optimal fixation strategy with small target
separations would be to maintain foveal alignment at one target location. With
large target separations, reduced disparity resolution in the retinal periphery
could elevate thresholds more than the oculomotor errors associated with foveal
gaze shifts. Then, the optimal strategy with large target separations would be
to make foveal gaze shifts between targets.
This experiment compared stereo-slant discrimination
thresholds, measured with or without gaze shifts between the simultaneously
presented reference and test target, as a function of target separations. We
predict that the gaze shifts would benefit slant discrimination at large target
separations but not at small ones.
The test and reference stimuli were presented
simultaneously for 734 ms, which provided enough time to make one saccade from
the reference to the test. Subjects either maintained fixation on the reference
target (without gaze shift condition), or made a saccade from the reference to
the test target (gaze shift condition). Four vertical target separations were
used (2, 4, 8, and 12 deg).
Stereo-slant discrimination thresholds, measured with
or without gaze shifts as a function of target separation, are plotted for three
subjects in Figure 3. We fit the results with
quadratic functions. Both thresholds increased with target separation and
thresholds increased more abruptly for the without gaze shift condition than the
with gaze shift
condition. Figure 3 .
Stereo-slant discrimination thresholds measured with (open circles) or without
(open square) gaze shifts as a function of target separation. Both thresholds
increase with target separation, and thresholds for the without gaze shift
condition increased with target separation more abruptly than for the with gaze
shift condition ,
The increase of thresholds with target separation in
the simultaneous without gaze shift condition could be due to reduced disparity
resolution in the periphery. Gaze shifts between the reference and test
decreased the thresholds at large vertical separations, possibly by improving
the disparity resolution of the test stimulus ( McKee et al.,
1990).
Even though the gaze shifts placed both the reference and test target onto the
fovea, the thresholds for the simultaneous with gaze shift condition still rose
with target separation. The increase of stereo-slant threshold with target
separation could have resulted from a transition in viewing strategy from a
simultaneous comparison of the test and reference at small target separations,
when both were imaged near the foveal region, to sequential foveal views of the
two targets at larger target separations. Several factors could contribute to
the threshold elevation with target separation in the gaze shift condition,
including oculomotor errors, memory loss and reduced use of the gradient of
relative disparity between adjacent edges of the two targets.
Gaze shifts between large target separations could
introduce oculomotor errors that have both version and horizontal vergence
components, both of which have been shown to increase with saccade amplitude ( Becker,
1972;
Bridgeman & Stark,
1979;
Collewijn et al.,
1988;
Henson,
1979;
Mack,
1970;
Whipple & Wallach,
1978). Oculomotor errors that were unregistered could add variability to the
mapping of disparity to slant estimates.
Memory loss is a temporal factor that would elevate
thresholds if viewing strategy changed from simultaneous comparisons during
steady fixation to sequential ones with gaze shifts. Even though test and
reference stimuli were presented simultaneously, memory loss could occur with
asynchronous foveal views, before and after gaze shifts, when the separation
between test and reference targets was large.
Simultaneous comparison of the gradient of relative
disparities between adjacent edges of two targets ( Gillam et al., 1984) might become less
effective as target separation increased and with the introduction of a time
delay between foveal views of the reference and test stimulus in the gaze shift
condition.
Experiment 2: Factors That Affect Stereo-Slant Discrimination Between Vertically Separated Targets
In the first experiment, we concluded that the gaze
shifts could improve stereo-slant discrimination at large vertical target
separations (> 4 deg). We also observed that thresholds for the simultaneous
with gaze shift condition increased with target separation.
In Experiment 2, three conditions were used to evaluate
the contribution of oculomotor errors, memory loss, and edge comparison to
stereo-slant threshold elevation. The three conditions included sequential
presentation of reference and test slant stimuli, either with or without gaze
shifts, and simultaneous presentation without gaze shifts. All three conditions
varied vertical target separation and had a short stimulus duration (167
ms).
The first condition (sequential with gaze shift)
quantified the influence of oculomotor errors on thresholds for sequential slant
discrimination. In this condition, oculomotor errors are the main factor that
could change with amplitude of gaze shifts. Because targets were presented
sequentially, with a fixed ISI (400 ms), memory loss and disparity resolution
were independent of target separation, and asynchronous stimulation minimized
the use of the gradient of relative disparity information between the adjacent
target edges. We predict that if oculomotor errors increase with saccade
amplitude, then the threshold for the sequential with gaze shift condition could
increase with target separation.
The second and third conditions compared sequential and
simultaneous slant discrimination, both without gaze shifts, to reveal the
combined influence of (1) memory loss, (2) the gradient of relative edge
disparities, and (3) the resolution of disparity in the periphery. The
resolution of disparity decreases with target separation equally in both the
simultaneous and the sequential conditions.
Memory loss of target information, that was independent
of target separation, could be introduced by the time delay (400 ms) between
stimuli in the sequential without gaze shift condition ( Foley, 1976). Memory loss would be minimal
in the simultaneous condition. We predict that if temporal delay only influences
memory loss, then any difference between thresholds for the sequential and
simultaneous conditions measured without gaze shifts would be constant at all
target separations.
The gradient of relative disparity between target edges
is more useful for slant discrimination in simultaneous condition than in the
sequential condition. If the use of the gradient of relative disparity between
target edges were reduced as target separation increased, then the difference in
simultaneous and sequential thresholds in the without gaze shift conditions
would be larger at small than large target separations.
Sequential With Gaze Shift Condition
The reference and test stimuli were each presented
sequentially for 167 ms with a 400-ms ISI and subjects made a saccade from the
reference to the test target. This ISI was chosen to approximate the sum of the
normal saccade latency (250 ms) and the longest saccade duration (100 ms) that
occur with large saccades.
Sequential Without Gaze Shift Condition
The reference and test targets were each presented for
167 ms with a 400-ms ISI while fixation was held on the center location of the
reference target.
Simultaneous Without Gaze Shift Condition
The reference and test stimuli were presented
simultaneously for 167 ms while fixation was held on the center location of the
reference target. Targets were separated
vertically with the test elevated above the reference at the same separations as
used in Experiment 1.
Stereo-slant discrimination thresholds, measured with
different vertical separations between the test and reference stimuli, are
plotted for three subjects in Figure 4.
Data are shown for the three conditions: sequential with a gaze shift (filled
circles) or without a gaze shift (open circles), and simultaneous without a gaze
shift (open squares).
Figure 4 .
Stereo-slant discrimination thresholds are plotted as a function of vertical
target separation for three conditions, including: sequential presentation with
or without gaze shifts (filled and open circles), and simultaneous presentation
without gaze shifts (open squares). For the sequential with gaze shift
condition, thresholds were constant at all target separations, but they
increased with target separation for the other two without-gaze shift
conditions. In the without-gaze shift conditions, thresholds were higher at all
target separations for the sequential than the simultaneous target
presentations.
Sequential With Gaze Shift Condition
As separation increased, thresholds remained almost
constant with vertical separation. The fitted slopes did not differ
significantly from zero (p > .05).
The independence of thresholds on target separation suggests that oculomotor
errors associated with vertical saccadic gaze shifts had little if any effect on
the sequential slant discrimination threshold. Vertical disparity could not be
used to estimate distance and azimuth, which is critical to the slant
estimation, because the target was too narrow to provide adequate vertical
disparity information.
In contrast to the two without gaze shift conditions,
the thresholds for the sequential with gaze shift condition were independent of
target separation. This constant
threshold could be explained in several ways.
First, there might not be much horizontal version errors associated with
vertical saccades. Second there are
horizontal version errors, but they do not vary with saccade
amplitude. Third, there is not much
error of horizontal vergence associated with vertical
saccades. Fourth, there are horizontal
vergence errors, but they are independent of saccade
amplitude. Vergence errors would only
change the magnitude of slant of a non-fronto parallel surface. However, when
the fronto-parallel reference surface is perceived as slanted due to errors in
azimuth, then vergence errors could have an impact. Vergence errors could also
affect slant threshold because of the low resolution of disparity information
off the horoptor. These four
possibilities are addressed in Experiments 3 and 4.
Simultaneous and Sequential Without Gaze Shift Conditions
Thresholds were lower at all vertical target
separations for the simultaneous (open squares) than the sequential
presentations (open circles) of reference and test stimuli. Two factors differed
in the simultaneous and sequential without gaze shift conditions. One factor was
the memory loss introduced by 400-ms ISI between test and reference stimuli in
the sequential
condition.
Memory loss could introduce a uniform threshold elevation for the
sequential condition across vertical target separations. The other factor was
the more effective use of the gradient of relative disparity information between
the test and reference edges in the simultaneous condition ( Gillam et al., 1984). At small target
separation, the reduced use of the gradient of relative disparity information in
the sequential condition might introduce an additional elevation of the
sequential above the simultaneous
threshold.
We fit the results from the sequential and simultaneous
without gaze shift conditions in Figure 4
with quadratic functions. The curves illustrated that the difference between
these two conditions was not constant. Figure 5
illustrates a schematic of uniform and nonuniform components of the threshold
elevation of the sequential without gaze shift condition over the simultaneous
one. The dashed line is a normalization of the sequential fit to coincide with
the simultaneous fit at the largest target separation. The divergence of the
dashed and solid curves at small separations could result from the reduced use
of the gradient of relative disparity information at target edges in the
sequential
condition. Figure 5.
Schematic summary that illustrates two possible factors that would differ
between the sequential and simultaneous threshold curves shown in Figure 4. The lower red and higher blue solid
line represent the simultaneous and sequential without gaze shift threshold
curves. Two factors could contribute to the elevation of thresholds for the
sequential condition. One is the memory loss that elevates thresholds uniformly
from dashed blue line to the solid blue line (indicated by the blue arrows). The
other is the use of the gradient of relative disparity information between
edges, which decreases as target separation increases in simultaneous condition,
and results in the non-uniform elevation in thresholds for the sequential
condition (from red solid curve to the dashed blue curve, indicated by the red
arrows).
We concluded from Figure 4 and
Figure 5 that thresholds for each subject were
affected differently by memory loss and the gradient of relative disparity. ZZ
was affected more by the gradient of relative disparity in simultaneous
condition, and less by the memory loss in sequential condition. CS was affected
little by either the gradient of relative disparity in simultaneous condition or
the memory loss in sequential condition. PI was affected less by the gradient of
relative disparity in simultaneous condition, and more by the memory loss in
sequential condition.
Experiment 3: Sequential Slant Discrimination With Horizontal Gaze Shifts
The sequential with gaze shift condition in Experiment
2 tested the influence of oculomotor errors associated with vertical gaze shifts
on slant
discrimination.
The results suggested that the oculomotor errors had no significant
effect on the threshold. However, horizontal saccades might introduce more
horizontal version errors and have therefore a greater influence on slant
discrimination thresholds than would vertical gaze shifts.
We used short height stimuli (1.5 deg) to minimize the
use of vertical disparity cues to azimuth so that the azimuth estimation
depended mainly on horizontal version information ( Backus et al., 1999). Experiment 2
minimized the effects of horizontal version errors on slant discrimination by
separating the reference and test targets vertically. Experiment 3 was designed
to reveal the affects of horizontal version errors on sequential slant
discrimination by making saccades between horizontally separated targets.
Assuming that horizontal version errors increase with saccade amplitude, we
predict that azimuth signals and stereo-slant thresholds would be affected more
by errors associated with horizontal than vertical gaze shifts and that the
thresholds would increase with saccade
amplitude.
Sequential stereo-slant thresholds measured with
horizontal gaze shifts were compared to thresholds measured with vertical gaze
shifts in Experiment 2. Reference and test targets were each presented for 167
ms with a 400-ms ISI. The test stimulus was 2 deg above the reference and was
displaced horizontally along a virtual fronto-parallel plane with 4 separations
(2-12 deg). The slant discrimination was relative to fronto-parallel plane and
slant was specified in head-centric coordinates.
Figure 6 compares the
sequential stereo-slant discrimination thresholds measured with vertical and
horizontal gaze shifts. Thresholds were similar for the vertical (filled
circles) and horizontal (open squares) gaze shift conditions. Similar to the
vertical gaze shift condition, the fitted slopes for each subject were not
significantly different from zero ( p
> .05) for horizontal gaze shift. The similar results for the two saccadic
conditions indicate that the variance of oculomotor signals for azimuth had
little affect on stereo-slant estimates. Either this is because the horizontal
version error is small in comparison to other error sources that determine
threshold, or it is because version errors do not increase with saccade
amplitude. However, prior studies ( Becker,
1972;
Boucher et al.,
2001;
Bridgeman & Stark,
1979;
Henson,
1979;
Mack,
1970;
Whipple & Wallach,
1978) suggest that horizontal version errors do increase with saccade
amplitude.
Figure 6. A
comparison of stereo-slant discrimination thresholds measured with either a
horizontal or vertical gaze shift during sequential target presentations. The
reference and test stimuli were presented sequentially with a 400-ms ISI.
Results for the vertical and horizontal gaze shifts are similar.
It is surprising that gaze shifts had so little
influence on slant discrimination thresholds at large horizontal target
separations given that sequential stereo-depth thresholds, measured with gaze
shifts, have been observed to rise with target separation ( Enright,
1991b;
Ogle, 1956). It has been argued
that the elevation for sequential stereo-depth is caused by horizontal vergence
errors that introduce noise into absolute disparity signals ( McKee et al.,
1990;
Westheimer, 1979b). In
addition, horizontal version and vergence errors could both potentially produce
errors in distance information needed to scale stereo-depth. Although we tried
to minimize the influence of oculomotor errors, we didn’t expect that we
fully succeeded. Slant estimates are less influenced by oculomotor errors than
is stereo-depth, and in the next experiment (4), we measured stereo-depth
thresholds to test this assertion. It is possible that the subjects in this
experiment had little variation of horizontal vergence with vertical saccades or
that their horizontal vergence errors were independent of saccade
amplitude.
Experiment 4: Stereo-Depth Discrimination Thresholds With Vertical Gaze Shifts
Indeed, if subjects in our experiment had little
variation of horizontal vergence error with saccade amplitude, then we would
predict that sequential stereo-depth thresholds measured with gaze shifts would
also be independent of target separation.
We have argued that small amounts of horizontal vergence errors, that are
thought to elevate sequential stereo-depth thresholds, do not elevate sequential
stereo-slant discrimination thresholds because they are based upon disparity
gradient information within the test stimulus. Estimates of stereo-depth between
two points rely exclusively upon differences in absolute disparities. The
difference in two absolute disparities subtended by the two dots is believed to
be influenced by horizontal vergence errors when the absolute disparities are
presented sequentially ( McKee et al.,
1990;
Westheimer, 1979b). Prior
investigations of sequential stereo-depth discrimination, that allowed subjects
to make saccades between targets, observed that thresholds increased with target
separation ( Enright,
1991b;
Ogle, 1956). The increase of
sequential stereo-depth thresholds with target separation, measured with gaze
shifts, could result from an increase in the amplitude of horizontal vergence
errors with saccade amplitude ( Collewijn et al.,
1988;
Enright,
1989). Prior studies of sequential
stereopsis ( Enright,
1991a,
1991b; Ogle, 1956) were conducted
with simultaneous presentation of test and reference stimuli that were viewed
with alternating foveal gaze shifts. The elevation of sequential stereo-depth
thresholds with increasing target separations could be related either to the
reduced disparity resolution in the retinal periphery during any given fixation,
or to an increase of oculomotor errors as saccade amplitude increased. In this
investigation, we have eliminated the first possibility by presenting targets
sequentially so that they were only visible at the fovea and not in the retinal
periphery. With alternating stimulus presentations, any influence of target
separation would be limited to oculomotor errors associated with saccades.
The goal of this experiment was to confirm Ogle ( 1956) and Enright’s ( 1991a) observation of elevated sequential
stereo-depth thresholds when the targets were presented sequentially and
subjects made gaze shifts between targets. Here, we make a direct comparison
between sequential stereo-depth and sequential stereo-slant discrimination, both
measured with vertical gaze shifts as a function of target separation, to
determine if horizontal vergence errors might have a bigger effect on the
sequential stereo-depth task than on the sequential stereo-slant task.
Based on the results of Experiment 3, we assume that
vertical version has a minimal effect on estimates of azimuth, and the main
influence of vertical saccades on sequential stereo-depth thresholds would be to
introduce horizontal vergence errors ( Collewijn et al.,
1988;
Enright, 1989). We predict that
the stereo-depth threshold would increase with target separation (saccade
amplitude) if the horizontal vergence errors associated with vertical gaze shift
increased with the saccade amplitude.
Stereo-depth thresholds were measured with gaze shifts
between two vertically separated and sequentially presented single-dot stimuli.
The results were compared to the stereo-slant thresholds measured in the
sequential with gaze shift condition in Experiment 2. The same subjects were
used as in Experiment 3; they showed little or no change in sequential
stereo-slant thresholds with gaze shifts.
The methods in this experiment were analogous to the slant discrimination
experiment, except here we used reference and test stimuli, each composed of a
single dot instead of a plane composed of many dots. The reference and test dots
were presented sequentially for 167 ms each with a 400-ms ISI, and subjects made
a vertical saccadic gaze shift between them. The subject’s task was to
judge whether the upper test dot was farther or nearer than the lower reference
dot. The vertical separation between the dots was varied from 2-12 deg. Subject
PI could not perform the task with a target separation greater than 4 deg
because at large separations, stimuli that were below his stereo-depth threshold
appeared diplopic.
Figure 7 plots
stereo-depth discrimination thresholds (open circle) measured at different
vertical separations between two dots with a saccadic gaze shift between them.
For comparison, the sequential stereo-slant thresholds (filled circles) measured
with vertical gaze shifts in Experiment 2 were transformed into the equivalent
relative disparity values between the lateral edges of the slant stimulus and
the fronto-parallel plane. These estimates are based on the largest relative
disparity that might determine threshold, however slant thresholds could have
been determined by lower relative disparity estimates that corresponded to
disparities closer to the central fixation point. These estimated disparity
thresholds for slant discrimination are plotted as filled symbols in Figure 7 below the stereo-depth
thresholds. Figure 7 . A
comparison of stereo-slant (filled circles) and stereo-depth (open circles)
thresholds measured with gaze shifts during the sequential presentation of
reference and test stimuli. Stereo-slant thresholds were converted to units of
disparity. Differences in the stereo-slant and stereo-depth threshold suggest
that horizontal vergence errors appear to increase with saccade amplitude, and
they have a greater influence on stereo-depth thresholds than on stereo-slant
thresholds.
Unlike the results for the sequential stereo-slant
condition with gaze shifts (filled circles), sequential stereo-depth thresholds
(open circles) increased with target separation, rather than remaining constant.
The increase of the sequential stereo-depth threshold with target separation
suggests that the horizontal vergence error amplitude does increase with the
magnitude of gaze shifts, and it is mainly responsible for the increase of
stereo-depth threshold with target separation. The minimal effect of oculomotor
errors on slant discrimination threshold could be attributed to the presence of
relative disparities contained in both the test and reference slant stimuli that
make stereo-slant less sensitive to oculomotor errors than is
stereo-depth.
Do Gaze Shifts Lower Thresholds for Stereo-slant Discrimination?
In Experiment 1, reference and test stimuli were
presented simultaneously for a long duration (734 ms), and subjects either made
a saccadic gaze shift between them or maintained fixation on the reference.
Results showed that stereo-slant discrimination thresholds increased more
abruptly with target separation in the without gaze shift than in the with gaze
shift condition. Gaze shifts improved slant discrimination thresholds for target
separations greater than 4 deg ( Figure 3).
The increased thresholds with target separation in
simultaneous without gaze shifts condition could be due to reduced disparity
resolution in the periphery. Gaze shifts between the reference and test
decreased the thresholds at large vertical separations by improving the
disparity resolution of the test stimulus ( McKee et al.,
1990).
Interestingly, even though the gaze shifts placed both the reference and test
target onto fovea, the thresholds for simultaneous with gaze shifts still rose
with target separation.
The increase of stereo-slant threshold with target
separation observed for the simultaneous with gaze shift condition in Experiment
1 could have resulted from a transition in viewing strategy from simultaneous
comparison of the test and reference at small target separations, when both were
imaged near the foveal region, to sequential foveal views of the two targets at
larger target separations.
An alternative explanation for the rise in stereo-slant
thresholds with target separation in the with gaze shift condition is that
subjects did not compare the sequential foveal views, but instead they tried to
make simultaneous comparisons of the test and reference target following each
saccade. If this alternative hypothesis
were true, then the thresholds for both with and without gaze shift conditions
would be identical at all the target separations. However, our results
demonstrate that stereo-slant discrimination thresholds improved with gaze
shifts at large target separations compared to the without gaze shift condition
(> 4 deg).
Factors Influencing Thresholds for Simultaneous and Sequential Slant Discrimination
We have identified several factors that might affect
stereo-slant discrimination either with or without gaze shifts
including
(1) resolution of disparity that
falls off with retinal eccentricity, (2) use of the gradient of relative
disparity between adjacent target edges that decrease as the separation of
targets increase in time and space, (3) memory loss that was introduced as
viewing strategy changed from simultaneous to sequential view, and (4)
oculomotor variability that increases with saccade
amplitude. The influence of retinal
eccentricity on disparity resolution was quantified by the sequential without
gaze shift condition in Experiment 2.
Combined effects of memory loss and gradient of relative
disparity between
abutting target edges was examined by comparing the results of the
simultaneous and sequential conditions
without gaze shifts in Experiment 2.
There was less memory loss and the gradient of relative disparity was
more useful in the simultaneous than sequential
condition. The possible influence of
oculomotor version errors was tested by comparing thresholds for the sequential
with vertical gaze shift condition in Experiment 2 and the sequential with
horizontal gaze shift condition in Experiment
3. The possible involvement of
horizontal vergence errors was tested in Experiment 4 by comparing thresholds
for sequential stereo-depth and sequential stereo-slant discrimination, both
measured with vertical gaze shifts between targets as a function of target
separation.
Disparity Resolution and Retinal Eccentricity
Stereo-slant thresholds in Experiment 2 increased with
vertical target separation for both simultaneous and sequential without-gaze
shift conditions. This trend resembles the increase of simultaneous and
sequential stereo-depth discrimination thresholds with target separation ( McKee et al., 1990).
For the constant fixation condition, two factors affect
the stereo-slant thresholds when separation between the two targets is varied.
First, the sensitivity to the disparity gradient within a surface, which is
computed from the differences in absolute disparities subtended by texture
elements, falls off with retinal eccentricity ( Fendick & Westheimer, 1983).
Second, separation between targets reduces sensitivity to the relative
disparities between the adjacent edges of the two surfaces ( Gillam et al., 1984). Similarly,
sensitivity to disparity between two points falls off as target separation
increases ( Ogle,
1956;
Rady & Ishak, 1955; Shipley & Popp, 1972; Wright, 1951). Oculomotor errors did not
vary with target separation because no saccadic gaze shifts were allowed.
Temporal factors were constant because the time delay was constant. Therefore,
the effect of retinal eccentricity on disparity resolution can be quantified in
the sequential without gaze shift condition (Experiment 2), assuming that the
gradient of relative disparity between target edges is only useful when the
targets are both present at the same time (i.e., not sequentially).
The effect of target separation on disparity resolution
is largest for ZZ and smallest for PI. Threshold increased by 3-fold for ZZ,
2.8-fold for CS and 2-fold for PI when target separation increased form 2-to-12
deg ( Figure 4). These values are similar to the
result of Fendick & Westheimer ( 1983), in which they found a
3-to-4-fold increase in stereo threshold measured from 2.5-to-10-deg target
separation (their Figure 5). They measured stereo-depth discrimination with both
test and reference targets presented at the same retinal eccentricity.
There are several factors that could have influenced
disparity sensitivity with retinal eccentricity. At the fovea, the variability
in the responses of the spatial filters is thought to determine disparity
resolution, and at larger eccentricities, the coarse spatial grain of the
peripheral retina and the cortical magnification factor could both affect
disparity resolution ( Burbeck &
Yap, 1990; Levi & Klein,
1990; McKee et al., 1990).
Effects of Temporal Asynchrony: Memory Loss and Reduced Use of the Gradient of Relative Disparity Between Edges
In Experiment 2, thresholds without gaze shifts were
lower for simultaneous (open squares) than sequential presentations (open
circles) of reference and test stimuli ( Figure
4), and both thresholds increased with target separation. The difference
between thresholds for these two conditions was accounted for by two factors,
both related to the temporal delay between the presentation of the reference and
test stimulus. One factor was the memory loss in sequential condition that would
be expected to elevate the thresholds uniformly across all target separations.
The other factor was due to the more effective use of the gradient of relative
disparity between abutted stereoscopic surface edges in the simultaneous
condition. The effect of this relative disparity information between edges of
targets depends on target separation in space ( Gillam & Blackburn, 1998) and
presumably in time. These two factors affected subjects differently.
Horizontal Version Errors
In the sequential with gaze shift condition in
Experiment 2, subjects made a vertical gaze shift to image spatially separated
reference and test stimuli onto the fovea where disparity resolution is higher
than in the periphery. The discrimination thresholds (filled circles in Figure 4) were independent of vertical target
separation (vertical saccade amplitude). The constant thresholds at all target
separations indicate that horizontal version errors associated with vertical
gaze shifts had little if any influence on slant threshold or that there was
little horizontal version error with vertical saccades.
More horizontal version errors would be expected to
accompany horizontal than vertical gaze shifts. Horizontal version errors could
elevate stereo-slant thresholds by introducing errors in estimates of azimuth
that are used to correct slant estimates in oculo-centric and head-centric
coordinates ( Backus et al.,
1999). Horizontal version signals
are most influential for estimates of target azimuth when vertical disparity
information for azimuth is minimized with short-height stimuli, such as was used
in our experiments.
The possible influence of horizontal version errors on
azimuth estimates for recovering slant was examined in Experiment 3 by comparing
sequential stereo-slant discrimination thresholds measured with saccades between
vertically and horizontally separated test and reference stimuli, as a function
of their separation. The thresholds for the two conditions were equal and
independent of target separation ( Figure 6)
demonstrating either that both measures of sequential stereo-slant thresholds
were unaffected by horizontal version errors or that version errors were
independent of saccade amplitude. The
latter possibility is unlikely given the prior reports of increased variability
of eye position with saccade amplitude ( Boucher et al., 2001).
Horizontal Vergence Errors
Experiment 4 provided indirect evidence for the
presence of horizontal vergence errors that increased with vertical saccade
amplitude. This experiment measured
sequential stereo-dot depth
discrimination thresholds as a function of vertical separation while
allowing saccades between the sequentially presented reference and test
targets. Horizontal vergence errors are
believed to introduce independent disparity errors for absolute disparities
subtended by sequentially presented test and reference dots as well as relative
disparity errors computed from a presumed differencing process ( Westheimer,
1979a). Results revealed that the
sequential stereo-depth thresholds (open circles), measured with gaze shifts
increased with target separation while the sequential stereo-slant thresholds
(filled circles) measured with gaze shifts remained constant ( Figure 7). This difference emphasizes the point
that the horizontal vergence errors do appear to elevate the
depth-discrimination threshold; however, they have little if any effect on slant
discrimination.
Horizontal vergence errors associated with gaze shifts
are assumed to be similar in stereo-slant and stereo-depth tasks, yet the effect
of these oculomotor errors on the discrimination thresholds is greater for the
stereo-depth task. Presumably this is because the disparity information was
processed differently in each task. In stereo-depth task, thresholds are based
on a sequential comparison of absolute disparities subtended by the test and
reference targets. Each absolute disparity is presented sequentially such that
they are contaminated by independent horizontal vergence errors for the two
targets. In stereo-slant task, relative disparity is present in each slant
stimulus and horizontal vergence errors could be cancelled in a presumed
differencing process for computing relative disparity ( Westheimer, 1979a).
Normally we can inspect the stereo-slant variations of
an extended surface, such as the ground plane, either with fixed gaze or with
gaze shifts. With fixed gaze, surface locations in different directions are
viewed at the same time (simultaneous stereopsis) in foveal and peripheral
locations. With saccadic gaze shifts, surface locations are viewed at different
times (sequential stereopsis), both at the fovea. When inspecting widely
separated surface locations, both strategies may be involved. Simultaneous
comparisons could be made between foveal and peripheral views, followed by
sequential foveal comparisons between saccadic gaze shifts.
Without gaze
shifts, the most prominent factor that limits stereo-slant thresholds is reduced
disparity resolution in the periphery.
With gaze shifts, the main factors that
limit sequential stereo-slant performance are memory loss and reduced use of the
gradient of relative disparity between abutted stereoscopic edges. Even though
horizontal vergence errors do occur with normal vertical and horizontal saccadic
gaze shifts, they have little influence on sequential stereo-slant thresholds,
but a large effect on sequential stereo-depth thresholds when targets are widely
separated.
Depending on the target separation, both simultaneous
and sequential viewing strategies have their own advantages and disadvantages.
Our results indicate that the critical separation at which performance is
improved by gaze shifts is approximately 4 deg.
This projected was supported by grant EYO 8882 from the
National Eye Institute of the National Institutes of Health. We appreciate the
helpful comments and suggestions made by Martin Banks and Michael Landy and two
anonymous reviewers. Commercial Relationships: none.
Backus, B. T., Banks, M. S., van Ee, R., &
Crowell, J. A. (1999). Horizontal and vertical disparity, eye position, and
stereoscopic slant perception.
Vision
Research, 39(6), 1143-1170.
[PubMed]
Badcock, D. R., &
Schor, C. M. (1985). Depth-increment detection function for individual spatial
channels. Journal of the Optical Society of
America A, 2(7), 1211-1216. [PubMed]
Bahill, A. T., Bahill,
K. A., Clark, M. R., & Stark, L. (1975). Closely spaced saccades.
Investigative Ophthalmology, 14(4),
317-321. [PubMed]
Banks, M. S., &
Backus, B. T. (1998). Extra-retinal and perspective cues cause the small range
of the induced effect. Vision Research,
38(2), 187-194. [PubMed]
Becker, W. (1972).
The control of eye movements in the saccadic
system. New York: Karger.
Boucher, L., Groh, J.
M., & Hughes, H. C. (2001). Afferent delays and the mislocalization of
perisaccadic stimuli. Vision Research,
41(20), 2631-2644. [PubMed]
Breitmeyer, B. G.,
& Ganz, L. (1976). Implications of sustained and transient channels for
theories of visual pattern masking, saccadic suppression, and information
processing. Psychological Review,
83(1), 1-36. [PubMed]
Brenner, E., Smeets,
J. B., & Landy, M. S. (2001). How vertical disparities assist judgements of
distance. Vision Research, 41(25-26),
3455-3465. [PubMed]
Brenner, E., &
van Damme, W. J. (1998). Judging distance from ocular convergence.
Vision Research, 38(4), 493-498. [PubMed]
Bridgeman, B.,
& Stark, L. (1979). Omnidirectional increase in threshold for image shifts
during saccadic eye movements. Perception
& Psychophysics, 25(3), 241-243. [PubMed]
Burbeck, C. A., &
Yap, Y. L. (1990). Two mechanisms for localization? Evidence for
separation-dependent and separation-independent processing of position
information. Vision Research, 30(5),
739-750. [PubMed]
Butler, T. W.,
& Westheimer, G. (1978). Interference with stereoscopic acuity: Spatial,
temporal, and disparity tuning. Vision
Research, 18(10), 1387-1392. [PubMed]
Collewijn, H.,
Erkelens, C. J., & Steinman, R. M. (1988). Binocular co-ordination of human
vertical saccadic eye movements. Journal of
Physiology, 404, 183-197. [PubMed]
Enright, J. T. (1989).
Convergence during human vertical saccades: Probable causes and perceptual
consequences. Journal of Physiology,
410, 45-65. [PubMed]
Enright, J. T. (1991a).
Exploring the third dimension with eye movements: Better than stereopsis.
Vision Research, 31(9), 1549-1562. [PubMed]
Enright, J. T. (1991b).
Stereo-thresholds: Simultaneity, target proximity and eye movements.
Vision Research, 31(12), 2093-2100. [PubMed]
Fendick, M.,
& Westheimer, G. (1983). Effects of practice and the separation of test
targets on foveal and peripheral stereoacuity.
Vision Research, 23(2), 145-150. [PubMed]
Foley, J. M. (1976).
Successive stereo and vernier position discrimination as a function of dark
interval duration. Vision Research,
16(11), 1269-1273. [PubMed]
Garding, J., Porrill,
J., Mayhew, J. E., & Frisby, J. P. (1995). Stereopsis, vertical disparity
and relief transformations. Vision Research,
35(5), 703-722. [PubMed]
Gillam, B., &
Lawergren, B. (1983). The induced effect, vertical disparity, and stereoscopic
theory. Perception & Psychophysics,
34(2), 121-130. [PubMed]
Gillam, B., Flagg, T.,
& Finlay, D. (1984). Evidence for disparity change as the primary stimulus
for stereoscopic processing. Perception &
Psychophysics, 36(6), 559-564. [PubMed]
Gillam, B., &
Blackburn, S. (1998) Surface separation decreases stereoscopic slant but a
monocular aperture increases it.
Perception,
27, 1267-1286. [ PubMed]
Henson, D. B. (1979).
Investigation into corrective saccadic eye movements for refixation amplitudes
of 10 degrees and below. Vision Research,
19(1), 57-61. [PubMed]
Klein,
S. A., Hu, Q. J., & Carney, T. (1996). The adjacent pixel nonlinearity:
Problems and solutions. Vision Research,
36(19), 3167-3181. [PubMed]
Kumar, T., &
Glaser, D. A. (1994). Some temporal aspects of stereoacuity.
Vision Research, 34(7), 913-925. [PubMed]
Levi, D. M., &
Klein, S. A. (1990). Equivalent intrinsic blur in spatial vision.
Vision Research, 30(12), 1971-1993. [PubMed]
Mack, A. (1970).
Investigation of relationship between eye and retinal image movement in
perception of movement. Perception &
Psychophysics, 8(5A), 291-298.
McKee, S. P., Welch, L.,
Taylor, D. G., & Bowne, S. F. (1990). Finding the common bond: Stereoacuity
and the other hyperacuities. Vision Research,
30(6), 879-891. [PubMed]
Ogle, K. N. (1950).
Researches in binocular vision.
Philadelphia, PA: W. B. Sanders
Company.
Ogle, K. N. (1956).
Stereoscopic acuity and the role of convergence.
Journal of the Optical Society of America,
46(4), 269-273.
Rady, A. A., &
Ishak, I. G. H. (1955). Relative Contributions of Disparity and Convergence to
Stereoscopic Acuity. Journal of the Optical
Society of America, 45(7), 530-534.
Rogers, B. J.,
& Bradshaw, M. F. (1993). Vertical disparities, differential perspective and
binocular stereopsis. Nature,
361(6409), 253-255. [PubMed]
Rogers, B. J.,
& Bradshaw, M. F. (1995). Disparity scaling and the perception of
frontoparallel surfaces. Perception,
24(2), 155-179. [PubMed]
Schor, C. M., Maxwell,
J. S., & Graf, E. W. (2001). Plasticity of convergence-dependent variations
of cyclovergence with vertical gaze. Vision
Research, 41(25-26), 3353-3369. [PubMed]
Shipley, T., &
Popp, M. (1972). Stereoscopic acuity and retinal eccentricity.
Ophthalmic Research, 3(4), 251-255.
Stevenson, S. B.,
Cormack, L. K.,& Schor, C. M. (1989). Hyperacuity, superresolution and gap
resolution in human stereopsis. Vision
Research, 29(11), 1597-1605. [PubMed]
Westheimer, G.
(1979a). Cooperative neural processes involved in stereoscopic acuity.
Experimental Brain Research, 36(3),
585-597. [PubMed]
Westheimer, G.
(1979b). The spatial sense of the eye. Proctor lecture.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual
Science, 18(9), 893-912. [PubMed]
Weymouth,
F. W. (1958) Visual sensory units and the minimum angle of resolution.
American Journal of Ophthalmology, 46,
102-113.
Whipple, W. R., & Wallach, H. (1978).
Direction-specific motion thresholds for abnormal image shifts during saccadic
eye movement. Perception & Psychophysics,
24(4), 349-355. [PubMed]
Wright, W. D. (1951). The
role of convergence in stereoscopic vision.
Proceedings of the Physical Society, B,
64, 289-297.
|