Binocular summation of equal-energy flashes of unequal duration

To determine if binocular summation occurs when increment flashes are of equal energy (Bloch’s law) but unequal in luminance-duration parameters, three Ss made temporal forced-choice judgments: (1) monocularly, (2) binocularly when the flashes to each eye were identical, (3) binocularly when the flashes to each eye were of equal energy but different in terms of their luminance and duration parameters, and (4) binocularly when flashes to each eye were separated by 100 msec. Binocular detection rates were consistently superior to monocular detection rates. Similarity in performance between Conditions 2 and 3 indicates that the binocular visual system responds only to the total energy of each monocular flash. The data from two Ss reveal that binocular performance was greater than that predicted on the basis of probability summation.     

Achromatic surface color and the direction of illumination

Hochberg and Beck (1954) found that an objectively upright trapezoid, when illuminated from above, appeared darker if it was viewed monocularly and lighter if it was viewed binocularly. Illuminated from in front, the same trapezoid then appeared lighter under monocular and darker under binocular viewing. Since the target appeared slanted under monocular but upright under binocular viewing, these changes in apparent lightness could be attributed, wholly or in part, to the apparent angle of incidence of the illumination on the surface. In two experiments, when 8-min periods of dark adaptation were introduced between monocular and binocular viewing, but when the arrangements were otherwise approximately the same as those of Hochberg and Beck, their results could not be observed. A third experiment demonstrated that the monocularly observed trapezoids did appear slanted.     

Binocular summation in detection of contrast flashes

We studied monocular and binocular detection of foveal flashes of different contrast. When background contours were binocularly fused, detectability (d’) of binocular test flashes was, on the average, twice the detectability of monocularly presented flashes. The precise amount of binocular advantage varied with test contrast: binocular improvement exceeded full summation for low test contrast, but fell below full summation at higher test contrasts. In the absence of contours in one eye, background luminances are not expected to sum, yet binocular detection is an average of 41.5% better than monocular detection. This indicates a difference in the functional organization of the fused binocular channel and a monocular channel.     

Are monocular arrays discriminable from binocular arrays?

On each trial of this experiment, a subject was visually stimulated by one or two shadows on a translucent background in a Telebinocular. For each subject, there were 40 trials of monocular stimulation by one shadow, 40 trials of monocular stimulation by two shadows (one in each hemifield), and 40 trials of binocular stimulation by two shadows (one in the left hemifield of one eye and another in the right hemifield of the other eye). Across these randomly ordered trials, 52 subjects were unable to discriminate two right-eye shadows from two left-eye shadows and were unable to discriminate two monocularly perceived shadows from two binocularly perceived shadows. Generally, subjects tended to misidentify right-hemifield shadows as right-eye shadows and tended to misidentify two-hemifield shadows as two-eye shadows.     

Perceptual fade-out occurs in the binocularly viewed Ganzfeld.

The conviction that time-varying signals are essential for normal visual perception was recently challenged by Bolanowski and Doty who observed that no 'blankouts' occurred in the binocularly viewed Ganzfeld. They suggested that monocularly perceived fading is caused by the eye in darkness suppressing the non-Ganzfeld-viewing eye. In the present paper, fade-out perception under monocular and binocular Ganzfeld viewing is compared, and the effect of the free eye on the Ganzfeld-viewing eye is tested directly. Results show that fading takes place under both monocular and binocular viewing. The data reenforce the view that transient inputs are necessary for maintaining visual perception. It is also shown that there are two Ganzfeld-related phenomena--fade-out and blackout. Fade-out, a slow gradual loss of brightness and of saturation perception, is observed by all subjects under both monocular and binocular viewing, and is affected by the light intensity and wavelength. It is probably retinal in origin. Blackout, a brief intermittent loss of all visual sensation, is experienced by some subjects in the monocular Ganzfeld only and is not appreciably affected by the light intensity or wavelength. It may be caused by a central blocking of all input to the perceiving stage.     

Size-arrival effects: the potential roles of conflicts between monocular and binocular time-to-contact information, and of computer aliasing.

With computer simulations of self-motion, participants approached a floating object and tried to "jump" over it without collision. Participants "jumped" significantly later over small objects than they did over larger objects. This occurred when the displays were viewed monocularly or binocularly, a finding that suggests that such size-arrival effects (DeLucia & Warren, 1994) were not due to a conflict between monocular and binocular cues to time-to-contact (TTC) information (Tresilian, 1994, 1995). Moreover, the results further suggest that size-arrival effects are not due to irregularities in TTC information that can occur from computer aliasing and that the latter does not always affect TTC estimation; visual information used in such judgments does not seem to be extracted on a frame-by-frame basis.     

Size-arrival effects: The potential roles of conflicts between monocular and binocular time-to-contact information, and of computer aliasing

With computer simulations of self-motion, participants approached a floating object and tried to “jump” over it without collision. Participants “jumped” significantly later over small objects than they did over larger objects. This occurred when the displays were viewed monocularly or binocularly, a finding that suggests that such size-arrival effects (DeLucia & Warren, 1994) were not due to a conflict between monocular and binocular cues to time-to-contact (TTC) information (Tresilian, 1994,1995). Moreover, the results further suggest that size-arrival effects are not due to irregularities in TTC information that can occur from computer abasing and that the latter does not always affect TTC estimation; visual information used in such judgments does not seem to be extracted on a frame-by-frame basis.     

Perceptual depth synthesis in the visual system as revealed by selective adaptation

Selective adaptations was used to determine the degree of interactions between channels processing relative depth from stereopsis, motion parallax, and texture. Monocular adaptations with motion parallax or binocular stationary adaptation caused test surfaces, viewed either stationary binocularly or monocularly with motion parallax, to appear to slant in the opposite direction compared with the slant initially adapted to. Monocular adaptations on frontoparallel surfaces covered with a pattern of texture gradients caused a subsequently viewed test surface, viewed either monocularly with motion parallax or stationary binocularly, to appear to slant in the opposite direction as the slant indicated by the texture in the adaptation condition. No aftereffect emerged in the monocular stationary test condition. A mechanism of independent channels for relative depth perception is dismissed in favor of a view of an asymmetrical interactive processing of different information sources. The results suggest asymmetrical inhibitory interactions among habituating slant detector units receiving inputs from static disparity, dynamic disparity, and texture gradients.     

Six-month-old infants perceive the hollow-face illusion

In this study we investigated infants' perception of the hollow-face illusion. 6-month-old infants were shown a concave mask under monocular and binocular viewing conditions and the direction of their reaches toward the mask was recorded. Adults typically perceive a concave mask as convex under monocular conditions but as concave under binocular conditions, depending on viewing distance. Based on previous findings that infants reach preferentially toward the parts of a display that are closest to them, we expected that, if infants perceive the hollow-face illusion as adults do, they would reach to the center of the mask when viewing it monocularly and to the edges when viewing it binocularly. The results were consistent with these predictions. Our findings indicated that the infants perceived the mask as convex when viewing it with one eye and concave when viewing it with two eyes. The results show that 6-month-old infants respond to the hollow-face illusion. Our finding suggests that, early in life, the visual system uses the constraint, or assumption, that faces are convex when interpreting visual input.     

Effect of structured visual environments on apparent eye level

Each of 12 subjects set a binocularly viewed target to apparent eye level; the target was projected on the rear wall of an open box, the floor of which was horizontal or pitched up and down at angles of 7.5 degrees and 15 degrees. Settings of the target were systematically biased by 60% of the pitch angle when the interior of the box was illuminated, but by only 5% when the interior of the box was darkened. Within-subjects variability of the settings was less under illuminated viewing conditions than in the dark, but was independent of box pitch angle. In a second experiment, 11 subjects were tested with an illuminated pitched box, yielding biases of 53% and 49% for binocular and monocular viewing conditions, respectively. The results are discussed in terms of individual and interactive effects of optical, gravitational, and extraretinal eye-position information in determining judgements of eye level.     

Binocular processing of brightness information: a vector-sum model

The relation between monocular and binocular brightness was examined. Clear evidence was found that the interaction between visual channels in binocular processing of brightness information implicates both an apparent averaging of monocular brightness when they are grossly different and a partial summation when they approach equality. A vector-sum model is shown to predict these properties. A nonmetric method was used to fit such a model to data from three experiments in each of which 15 subjects estimated brightness of binocularly fused targets. Magnitude estimation was used in two experiments, and cateogry ratings were obtained in the third experiment. When it was assumed only that subjects' responses were monotone with perceived brightness, estimates of the model's parameters from the data of the three experiments were almost identical, indicating that results from magnitude estimati;n and category rating can converge once nonlinear response functions are eliminated.     

Visual cues and perceived reachability

A rather consistent finding in studies of perceived (imagined) compared to actual movement in a reaching paradigm is the tendency to overestimate at midline. Explanations of such behavior have focused primarily on perceptions of postural constraints and the notion that individuals calibrate reachability in reference to multiple degrees of freedom, also known as the whole-body explanation. The present study examined the role of visual information in the form of binocular and monocular cues in perceived reachability. Right-handed participants judged the reachability of visual targets at midline with both eyes open, dominant eye occluded, and the non-dominant eye covered. Results indicated that participants were relatively accurate with condition responses not being significantly different in regard to total error. Analysis of the direction of error (mean bias) revealed effective accuracy across conditions with only a marginal distinction between monocular and binocular conditions. Therefore, within the task conditions of this experiment, it appears that binocular and monocular cues provide sufficient visual information for effective judgments of perceived reach at midline.     

Visual cues and perceived reachability

A rather consistent finding in studies of perceived (imagined) compared to actual movement in a reaching paradigm is the tendency to overestimate at midline. Explanations of such behavior have focused primarily on perceptions of postural constraints and the notion that individuals calibrate reachability in reference to multiple degrees of freedom, also known as the whole-body explanation. The present study examined the role of visual information in the form of binocular and monocular cues in perceived reachability. Right-handed participants judged the reachability of visual targets at midline with both eyes open, dominant eye occluded, and the non-dominant eye covered. Results indicated that participants were relatively accurate with condition responses not being significantly different in regard to total error. Analysis of the direction of error (mean bias) revealed effective accuracy across conditions with only a marginal distinction between monocular and binocular conditions. Therefore, within the task conditions of this experiment, it appears that binocular and monocular cues provide sufficient visual information for effective judgments of perceived reach at midline.     

Selective adaptation of monocular and binocular neurons in human vision

Psychophysical techniques were used to examine how subpopulations of visual neurons varying in their ocular dominance interacted in determining performance on a visual task. Using an asymmetric alternating adaptation of the left and right eyes, we manipulated the sensitivity of monocularly driven neurons while keeping the sensitivity of binocularly driven neurons constant. Relative threshold elevations were measured in the left eye, right eye, and both eyes of five observers following different ratios of alternating adaptation. It was found that whereas monocularly measured aftereffects varied monotonically as a function of the adaptation duration of the measured eye, the magnitude of the binocularly measured aftereffect remained constant regardless of how the adaptation was divided between the two eyes. This suggests that neurons differing in their ocular dominance pool their activity in determining sensitivity to a test target.     

Threat perception in the chameleon (Chamaeleo chameleon): evidence for lateralized eye use

Chameleons are arboreal lizards with highly independent, large amplitude eye movements. In response to an approaching threat, a chameleon on a vertical pole moves so as to keep itself away from the threat. In so doing, it shifts between monocular and binocular scanning of the threat and of the environment. We analyzed eye movements in the Common chameleon, Chamaeleo chameleon, during avoidance response for lateralization, that is, asymmetry at the functional/behavioral levels. The chameleons were exposed to a threat, approaching horizontally from clockwise or anti-clockwise directions, and that could be viewed monocularly or binocularly. Our results show three broad patterns of eye use, as determined by durations spent viewing the threat and by frequency of eye shifts. Under binocular viewing, two of the patterns were found to be both side dependent, that is, lateralized and role dependent ("leading" or "following"). However, under monocular viewing, no such lateralization was detected. We discuss these findings in light of the situation not uncommon in vertebrates, of independent eye movements and a high degree of optic nerve decussation and that lateralization may well occur in organisms that are regularly exposed to critical stimuli from all spatial directions. We point to the need of further investigating lateralization at fine behavioral levels.     

Dichoptic reading: The role of meaning in binocular rivalry

These experiments sought to determine whether meaning influences the predominance of one eye during binocular rivalry. In Experiment 1, observers tried to read meaningful text under conditions in which different text streams were viewed by the two eyes, a situation mimicking the classic dichotic listening paradigm. Dichoptic reading proved impossible even when the text streams were printed in different fonts or when one eye received a 5-sec advantage. Under non-rivalry conditions, the observers were able to read text presented at twice the rate used for dichoptic testing, indicating that cognitive overload does not limit performance under conditions of rivalry. In Experiment 2, observers were required to detect repeated presentations of a probe target within a string of characters presented to one eye. Although this task was easily performed under monocular viewing conditions, it proved difficult when the two eyes received dissimilar character strings. This was true regardless of whether the probed eye viewed nonsense strings, real words, or meaningful text. In a condition designed to encourage semantic processing of one eye’s view, the observers were required to detect animal names as well as to detect the probe target. Performance remained inferior to that measured under monocular conditions. Even the observer’s own name proved insufficient to influence the predominance of one eye under conditions of dichoptic stimulation. When two text strings were physically superimposed and viewed monocularly, essentially no probes were detected, indicating that the failure to see some probes during rivalry reflects a limitation unique to dichoptic viewing. These results contradict theories attributing binocular rivalry to an attentional process that operates on monocular inputs that have received refined analysis. This conclusion may be limited to rival stimuli whose meaning is defined linguistically, not structurally.     

Fechner’s paradox reflects a nonmonotone relation between binocular brightness and luminance

Twenty subjects judged the brightness of binocularly fused targets whose monocular luminances were varied independently. On each trial, the left eye was presented with one of two relatively high luminances and the right eye was presented with one of 15 luminances from the range in which Fechner’s paradox is effective. The objective of the experiment was to determine whether the psychophysical function over this range was nonmonotonic and Ll-shaped, as implied by several models of binocular brightness, or monotone increasing, but discontinuous at zero right-eye luminance. The functions associated with both left-eye intensities were found to be nonmonotone. Both minima were near the upper bound of the mesopic range.     

Effect of ecological viewing conditions on the Ames' distorted room illusion

Ecological theory asserts that the Ames' distorted room illusion (DRI) occurs as a result of the artificial restriction of information pickup. According to Gibson (1966, 1979), the illusion is eliminated when binocular vision and/or head movement are allowed. In Experiment 1, to measure the DRI, we used a size-matching technique employing discs placed within an Ames' distorted room. One hundred forty-four subjects viewed the distorted room or a control apparatus under four different viewing conditions (i.e., restricted or unrestricted head movement), using monocular and binocular vision. In Experiment 2, subjects viewed binocularly and were instructed to move freely while making judgments. Overall, the main findings of this study were that the DRI decreased with increases in viewing access and that the DRI persisted under all viewing conditions. The persistence of the illusion was felt to contradict Gibson's position.     

Aftereffect of inspection of a perspectival stimulus for slant depth: A new normalization effect

The Ss made judgments of the frontoparallel plane monocularly and binocularly by adjusting the position of a rotatable thin luminous line viewed in darkness. The judgments were made before and after a 10-min period of monocular inspection of a luminous outline frontoparallel trapezoid which was the projection of a rectangle rotated in depth. Verbal reports indicated normalization of perspectival slant depth, i.e., the inspection figure appeared less rotated, and the line settings exhibited an aftereffect bf normalization. These findings may contribute toward an account of certain previously unexplained observations reported in an earlier study by Epstein and Morgan-Paap (1974) dealing with adaptation to uniocular image magnification.     

Binocular fixation in the newborn baby.

Three experiments are reported in which the newborn baby's ability to fixate binocularly was investigated, using the corneal reflection technique for measuring eye fixation position. Two criteria for consistent binocular fixation were assessed. These are (1) the two eyes will be optically more divergent when fixating more distant targets, and (2) each eye will be scored as being on-target when corrections for the expected deviations of the pupil center from the fixated stimulus are introduced.In the first experiment vertical arrays of lights were separately shown at distances of 10 and 20 in. from the subjects' eyes (with the retinal image size and luminance of the stimuli held constant). The 12 newborns who gave results at both viewing distances reliably converged to both stimuli, the optical divergence of the pupil centers of the eyes increasing with presentation of the more distant stimulus. In Expt 2 similar stimuli at 5 and 10 in. from the eyes were shown. It was again the case that the subjects reliably converged to the stimulus at 10 in. This was no so for the stimulus at 5 in., and many subjects fixated this stimulus with monocular vision. The failure to converge is probably due to an inability to accommodate to this near distance. In Expt 3 different stimuli (a vertical strip of light, an outline triangle and square, and an array of squares) were presented a constant distance (10 ± 1 in.) from the eyes. The majority of the 15 subjects binocularly fixated all three stimuli: for those subjects who failed to converge consistently to these stimuli the observed alternatives to binocular fixation were monocular fixation, divergent strabismus, and a third category of response that is most probably an indication of inattention to the stimulus. It can be concluded that the newborn baby possesses the ability to fixate binocularly an appropriately presented stimulus, and has the basic requirements for binocular vision.