On utrocular discrimination

Observers with good stereoacuity judged which eye received sine-wave grating patterns in a two-category forced-choice procedure. Large individual differences were found, but for most observers reliable discrimination was achieved at low spatial frequencies. No observer could perform the task above chance levels at high spatial frequencies. Discrimination was unaffected by retinal location, grating orientation, grating contrast, stimulus duration, or practice with feedback. Among observers who could perform the task, the following results were obtained: (1) Introduction of high spatial frequency components did not interfere with performance so long as a low spatial frequency component was present. (2) When gratings of low equal spatial frequency were presented to both eyes simultaneously at different contrast levels, observers could identify which eye received the higher contrast. (3) At low spatial frequencies, observers could distinguish monocular from binocular presentation. (4) Temporal frequency variations (counterphase flicker) influenced performance for some observers. Binocular summation and interocular transfer were unaffected by the spatial frequency variations which modulate utrocular discrimination. A new procedure for measuring stereopsis was developed which made possible comparison of utrocular discrimination with stereopsis at specific spatial frequencies. Stereopsis appeared mildly affected by spatial frequency.     

Binocular and monocular detection of Gabor patches in binocular two-dimensional noise

Contrast thresholds for detecting sine-wave Gabor patches in two-dimensional externally added random-pixel noise were measured. Thresholds were obtained for monocular and binocular signals in the presence of spatial correlated (identical) and uncorrelated (independent) noise in the two eyes. Measurements were obtained at four different spectral densities of noise (including zero). Thresholds were higher for monocular stimuli than for binocular, and higher in the presence of correlated noise compared to uncorrelated noise. The magnitude of binocular summation, similar in correlated and uncorrelated noise, decreased with increasing noise strength. The independent contributions of internal noise and sampling efficiency to detection were analysed. Sampling efficiencies were higher for binocular than for monocular viewing for both types of noise, with values being higher with uncorrelated noise. Binocular stimuli showed a lower equivalent noise level compared to the mean monocular case for both types of noise.     

Binocular unmasking with unequal interocular contrast: the case for multiple Cyclopean eyes.

Under certain conditions, the detection threshold for a sinusoidal grating embedded in a noisy background may be an order of magnitude lower when binocular cues are available than when monocular cues only are present. Such binocular unmasking occurs only when the degree of interocular disparity for the target differs from that of the background. Two classes of models have been advanced to account for such unmasking. The first assumes that orientation-specific, spatial frequency channels in each eye encode the amplitude and phase of the spatial frequency component of the pattern the channel is tuned to detect. Thus, a difference in interocular disparity between target and background could result in interocular amplitude and/or phase differences in left- and right-eye spatial frequency channels. When, however, there are no disparity differences between target and background, there will be no interocular differences in amplitude and phase in the left- and right-eye channels. In this model, then, binocular unmasking reflects the binocular system's ability to respond to interocular amplitude and/or phase differences in the patterns presented to the two eyes. In the second class of models, it is assumed that the left- and right-eye patterns are first summed to form a "Cyclopean" eye. In these models, detection depends on the effect this summation process has on the power spectrum of the summated patterns. To decide between these two classes of models, we observed the occurrence of binocular unmasking when (1) the contrast of masker and signal was varied identically in both eyes and (2) the contrast of masker and signal was varied in one eye only. Consistent with our previous research, we found that the results can be accounted for in terms of a linear summation model of binocular unmasking; the alternative interocular phase detection model was disproved. The implications of these findings for binocular contrast summation in the absence of visual noise are discussed.     

Binocular unmasking with unequal interocular contrast: The case for multiple Cyclopean eyes

Under certain conditions, the detection threshold for a sinusoidal grating embedded in a noisy background may be an order of magnitude lower when binocular cues are available than when monocular cues only are present. Such binocular unmasking occurs only when the degree of interocular disparity for the target differs from that of the background. Two classes of models have been advanced to account for such unmasking. The first assumes that orientation-specific, spatial frequency channels in each eye encode the amplitude and phase of the spatial frequency component of the pattern the channel is tuned to detect. Thus, a difference in interocular disparity between target and background could result in interocular amplitude and/or phase differences in left- and right-eye spatial frequency channels. When, however, there are no disparity differences between target and background, there will be no interocular differences in amplitude and phase in the left- and right-eye channels. In this model, then, binocular unmasking reflects the binocular system’s ability to respond to interocular amplitude and/or phase differences in the patterns presented to the two eyes. In the second class of models, it is assumed that the left and right-eye patterns are first summed to form a “Cyclopean” eye. In these models, detection depends on the effect this summation process has on the power spectrum of the summated patterns. To decide between these two classes of models, we observed the occurrence of binocular unmasking when (1) the contrast of masker and signal was varied identically in both eyes and (2) the contrast of masker and signal was varied in one eye only. Consistent with our previous research, we found that the results can be accounted for in terms of a linear summation model of binocular unmasking; the alternative interocular phase detection model was disproved. The implications of these findings for binocular contrast summation in the absence of visual noise are discussed.     

Stimulus-response compatibility between stimulated eye and response location: implications for attentional accounts of the Simon effect

One influential theory of the Simon effect, the attention-shift hypothesis, states that attention movements are the origin of spatial stimulus codes. According to this hypothesis, stimulus-response compatibility effects should be absent when attention shifts are prevented. To test this prediction, we used monocular patches of color that required left or right key-press responses. About half of the subjects could discriminate which eye was stimulated (in a subsequent task), and showed strong spatial compatibility effects between the stimulated eye and the response location. The other half of the subjects could not make a utrocular discrimination (i.e., they could not judge which eye had received monocular stimulation), but the pattern of results was the same: the fastest reaction times were observed when the stimulated eye corresponded spatially to the required response (i.e., a Simon effect). Since the subjects presumably did not move their attention (from the subject's point of view, the stimuli were presented centrally), our results indicate that spatial codes can be produced in the absence of attention shifts. These results also show that utrocular discrimination can be assessed via indirect measures that are much more sensitive than explicit measures.     

On binocular vision:Motion perception and pattern-reversal cortical responses to gratings of fixed spatial frequency

Cortical responses evoked by a vertical moving sinusoidal grating of fixed spatial frequency and variable contrast were recorded from the occiput. The potentials which resulted from binocular stimulation was on the average the linear vector sum of the responses obtained with monocular inspection of the pattern. A reanalysis of measurements of motion track enlargement (MTE) following monocular and binocular motion stimulation (Johansson, 1960) showed that the MTE for binocular vision could be accurately predicted by the same model. The outcome of the two studies may be closely related since pattern-reversal visually evoked potentials may be partly produced by movement and direction-sensitive mechanisms within the brain.     

Texture size specificity in the slant aftereffect

Transfer of the median plane slant aftereffect was assessed across changes in stimulus texture size (sine-wave grating frequency). Under binocular viewing, reliable decrements in aftereffect magnitude were observed when texture size was changed, compared with no-change control conditions. Under monocular viewing conditions, no significant aftereffects were found. The results indicate a spatial-frequency-specific component of binocular slant aftereffects.     

INVOLUNTARY LISTENING AIDS HEARING

Abstract —In two experiments, I simultaneously measured response time, accuracy, and response bias in an auditory intensity discrimination task to look for evidence of stimulus-driven attention orienting in auditory frequency space. The results demonstrated that a cue tone caused an apparently involuntary orienting of attention to the cue's frequency region, allowing faster and more accurate processing of a subsequent target tone when it occurred at the same frequency as the cue than when it occurred at a different frequency. Relationships between response time, accuracy, and bias measures also allowed masking and other effects to be separated from attention-orienting effects in these experiments.     

Investigating the time course of tactile reflexive attention using a non-spatial discrimination task

Peripheral cues are thought to facilitate responses to stimuli presented at the same location because they lead to exogenous attention shifts. Facilitation has been observed in numerous studies of visual and auditory attention, but there have been only four demonstrations of tactile facilitation, all in studies with potential confounds. Three studies used a spatial (finger versus thumb) discrimination task, where the cue could have provided a spatial framework that might have assisted the discrimination of subsequent targets presented on the same side as the cue. The final study circumvented this problem by using a non-spatial discrimination; however, the cues were informative and interspersed with visual cues which may have affected the attentional effects observed. In the current study, therefore, we used a non-spatial tactile frequency discrimination task following a non-informative tactile white noise cue. When the target was presented 150 ms after the cue, we observed faster discrimination responses to targets presented on the same side compared to the opposite side as the cue; by 1000 ms, responses were significantly faster to targets presented on the opposite side to the cue. Thus, we demonstrated that tactile attentional facilitation can be observed in a non-spatial discrimination task, under unimodal conditions and with entirely non-predictive cues. Furthermore, we provide the first demonstration of significant tactile facilitation and tactile inhibition of return within a single experiment.     

Suprathreshold binocular interactions for grating patterns

Binocular interactions of suprathreshold grating patterns have been investigated using a reaction time measure of contrast detection. Simple reaction times were determined for monocular and binocular viewing conditions over a contrast range from .63 to near threshold. The results from all subjects showed binocular summation for contrast levels near threshold, but there was considerable variation across subjects for contrast levels above threshold. Some subjects showed summation over the entire contrast range, but other subjects showed either binocular inhibition or binocular facilitation for some range of contrast levels. The pattern of binocular interaction for a given subject was consistent for several spatial frequencies. The differences in types of interaction between subjects, the variation in magnitude of binocular interaction with contrast level for each subject, and the data from experiments involving stimulation of noncorresponding retinal areas show that the binocular interactions found for suprathreshold stimuli cannot be accounted for on the basis of probability, and must, therefore, result from physiological interactions between the two eyes. These interactions have been investigated further under conditions of (1) induced fixation disparity, (2) horizontal gratings, and (3) orthogonally oriented gratings.     

Anatomy of a flash. 1. Two-peak masking and a temporal filling-in

A modified paradigm of Crawford masking was used to link masking to brightness fluctuation, as distinct from flash brightness. Thresholds were measured for a 10 ms incremental pulse (the 'probe') presented before, during, or after a 500 ms pulse (the 'flash'). Both pulses were spatially coextensive with the background field, thus the criterion for probe detection was purely temporal. The flash occurred either in the tested eye, the opposite eye, or in both eyes. In all conditions, masking was strongly bimodal: thresholds peaked near flash onset and flash offset. The flash was perceived as a unitary event. Bimodal masking is attributed to cortical on-and off-effects, as (i) dichoptic masking was strong and (ii) the same incremental probe was masked by either incremental or decremental flashes. Strikingly, monocular probe thresholds were about equally elevated by binocular as by monocular flashes, although the binocular flashes were brighter. Therefore, some monocular features can be preserved in the larger net binocular response. A general conclusion is that masking depends on the same transient neural responses that bring about a brightness fluctuation, whereas the appearance of the flash as a single event, a unitary change of brightness, depends on a different mechanism, perhaps a sustained response that performs a temporal filling-in.     

Binocular depth perception in the pigeon.

By means of a discrete-trial simultaneous discrimination procedure, pigeons were trained to respond differentially to visual arrays that were identical except that one of them contained a circle displaced in depth when viewed stereoscopically. Performance was severely disrupted when one eye was occluded. The monocular deficit was peculiar to the depth task, inasmuch as no such decrement was seen on a pattern discrimination. The results imply that presence of the displaced circle was discriminated on the basis of a binocular cue. It was also found that pigeons could discriminate the direction of the displacement. Discrimination of depth was independent of the global form and still occurred when elements of the array were randomly displaced in depth. Performance was not disrupted when the absolute convergence angle of the depth stimulus was changed. The cue that consistently accounted for the behavior seen was the detection of the relative angles of convergence--that is, the retinal disparity of the two planes in depth. Thus, despite the lateral position of the eyes of the pigeon, a small binocular field mediates the binocular discrimination of near objects in depth.     

Panum's fusional area estimated with a criterion-free technique

It has been reported that criterion-free estimates of the upper disparity limits for fusion of line targets are small enough to be accounted for by monocular vernier sensitivity. However, targets such as lines, which contain high spatial frequencies, may ensure small fusion limits, since fusion limits obtained with criterion-dependent methods for narrow-band targets, such as sinusoids or difference-of-Gaussian luminance profiles, are proportional to target spatial periods. Experiment 1 therefore explored whether criterion-free methods give fusion limits for narrow-band targets that can be accounted for by vernier sensitivity. Vertical fusion limits were estimated by a method that forced observers to discriminate a disparate sinusoidal grating from an immediately adjacent zero-disparity grating. Fusion limits were too large to be explained by monocular vernier thresholds obtained for the same targets. In addition, fusion limits were not affected by large changes in target contrast, whereas vernier thresholds increased as contrast was decreased. The results of Experiment 1 also argued against interocular suppression as the cause of single vision, since vernier offsets that were visible when viewed monocularly were invisible under binocular viewing conditions. In Experiment 2, manual adjustment of disparities yielded fusion limits little different from those obtained with the forced-choice method of Experiment 1, demonstrating that it is possible to design adjustment methods for assessing fusion limits that are as sensitive as forced-choice methods. In Experiment 3, large reductions in target contrast, which have the effect of decreasing disparity sensitivity, did not alter fusion limits, disconfirming the idea that fusion limits estimated with discriminative procedures represent disparity-detection thresholds. In Experiment 4, disparities were adjusted until a just noticeable difference in grating contrast appeared. These disparities were larger than fusion limits, indicating that fusion limits did not represent a change in apparent contrast arising from disparity limitations of binocular summation. Together, the four experiments support the existence of binocular fusion as a unique category of sensory performance, disconfirm several nonfusional explanations of single vision, and support the use of criterion-free as well as adjustment methods in measuring fusion limits.     

The role of voluntary and involuntary attention in selecting perceptual dominance during binocular rivalry

When incompatible images are presented to corresponding regions of each eye, perception alternates between the two monocular views (binocular rivalry). In this study, we have investigated how involuntary (exogenous) and voluntary (endogenous) attention can influence the perceptual dominance of one rival image or the other during contour rivalry. Subjects viewed two orthogonal grating stimuli that were presented to both eyes. Involuntary attention was directed to one of the grating stimuli with a brief change in orientation. After a short period, the cued grating was removed from the image in one eye and the uncued grating was removed from the image in the other eye, generating binocular rivalry. Subjects usually reported dominance of the cued grating during the rivalry period. We found that the influence of the cue declined with the interval between its onset and the onset of binocular rivalry in a manner consistent with the effect of involuntary attention. Finally, we demonstrated that voluntary attention to a grating stimulus could also influence the ongoing changes in perceptual dominance that accompany longer periods of binocular rivalry Voluntary attention did not increase the mean dominance period of the attended grating, but rather decreased the mean dominance period of the non-attended grating. This pattern is analogous to increasing the perceived contrast of the attended grating. These results suggest that the competition during binocular rivalry might be an example of a more general attentional mechanism within the visual system.     

Spatial-frequency masking with briefly pulsed patterns

Spatial-frequency masking was studied with briefly pulsed (25 ms) vertical gratings. The mask was a noise grating, and the test pattern was a sinusoidal grating. A low-frequency band of noise masked a low- but not high-spatial-frequency test grating when the patterns were presented simultaneously. A high-frequency band of noise did not mask a low-frequency test grating when the patterns were presented simultaneously or when the mask was presented after the test pattern (backward masking). Masking was, however, observed when the mask or test pattern was of sufficiently high contrast so that the stimuli had nonlinear distortion and thus produced DC shifts of the field luminance.     

Panum’s fusional area estimated with a criterion-free technique

It has been reported that criterion-free estimates of the upper disparity limits for fusion of line targets are small enough to be accounted for by monocular vernier sensitivity. However, targets such as lines, which contain high spatial frequencies, may ensure small fusion limits, since fusion limits obtained with criterion-dependent methods for narrow-band targets, such as sinusoids or difference-of-Gaussian luminance profiles, are proportional to target spatial periods. Experiment 1 therefore explored whether criterion-free methods give fusion limits for narrow-band targets that can be accounted for by vernier sensitivity. Vertical fusion limits were estimated by a method that forced observers to discriminate a disparate sinusoidal grating from an immediately adjacent zero-disparity grating. Fusion limits were too large to be explained by monocular vernier thresholds obtained for the same targets. In addition, fusion limits were not affected by large changes in target contrast, whereas vernier thresholds increased as contrast was decreased. The results of Experiment 1 also argued against interocular suppression as the cause of single vision, since vernier offsets that were visible when viewed monocularly were invisible under binocular viewing conditions. In Experiment 2, manual adjustment of disparities yielded fusion limits little different from those obtained with the forced-choice method of Experiment 1, demonstrating that it is possible to design adjustment methods for assessing fusion limits that are as sensitive as forced-choice methods. In Experiment 3, large reductions in target contrast, which have the effect of decreasing disparity sensitivity, did not alter fusion limits, disconfirming the idea that fusion limits estimated with discriminative procedures represent disparity-detection thresholds. In Experiment 4, disparities were adjusted until a just noticeable difference in grating contrast appeared. These disparities were larger than fusion limits, indicating that fusion limits did not represent a change in apparent contrast arising from disparity limitations of binocular summation. Together, the four experiments support the existence of binocular fusion as a unique category of sensory performance, disconfirm several nonfusional explanations of single vision, and support the use of criterion-free as well as adjustment methods in measuring fusion limits.     

Attentional mechanisms in visual signal detection: the effects of simultaneous and delayed noise and pattern masks

The attentional cuing effects in detection and some discrimination tasks depend on the use of backward masks and on the presence of external noise in the display. These effects have been attributed to an interruption masking mechanism, which terminates stimulus processing prematurely, and an external noise exclusion mechanism, which minimizes the perceptual effects of noise. To test whether the dependencies on masking and external noise are expressions of a single mechanism, observers detected grating patch stimuli, masked with noise masks or pattern masks, presented either simultaneously or after a delay of 60-90 msec. Contrary to an external noise exclusion account, but consistent with an interruption masking account, cuing effects were largest when the masks were delayed. However, weaker cuing effects were obtained with simultaneous masks, contrary to an interruption masking account. These results suggest that attentional effects in simple visual judgments are affected by mechanisms of both kinds.     

Binocular vision enhances phase discrimination by filtering the background

Previous studies have shown that the detectability of a noise-masked target can be enhanced under stereoscopic viewing when the target’s interocular disparity differs from that of the noise. This enhanced detectability can be accounted for by a model postulating that the binocular system linearly sums the left-eye and right-eye views of a visual scene. This model also predicts enhanced phase discrimination under specifiable interocular disparities of target and noise. Two experiments were conducted in which subjects were asked to discriminate between two luminance patterns (target and foil) that differed only in phase. The target patterns were constructed by summating two vertical sinusoidal gratings in which the phase difference between the higher and the lower spatial frequency gratings was 45°. The foils contained the same two component frequencies, with a phase difference of ?45°. Thus, targets and foils were mirror images of one another. The ability of subjects to Discriminate between these stereoscopically viewed mirror-image patterns was investigated under two sets of interocular disparities: those that, according to our model, would unmask one or both spatial frequency components, and those that would leave both components masked by the noise. Phase discrimination was enhanced only when both component frequencies of the target and foil were unmasked. The implications of these findings for template-matching and phase-discrimination models of pattern discrimination are considered.     

Monocular and binocular rivalry between contours.

The temporal characteristics of binocular and monocular rivalry between orthogonal gratings of the same or complementary colours were investigated. Rivalry was measured in terms of the dominance of either grating or the visibility of composites comprised of parts of both gratings. The total duration for which either grating was dominant was significantly longer in binocular rivalry between gratings of complementary colours. A comparison of binocular and monocular rivalry indicated considerable phenomenal differences between them. Dominance in binocular rivalry corresponds to the visibility of one grating alone; this occurs rarely in monocular rivalry, which is characterized by fluctuations in the distinctiveness of the gratings. The changes in distinctiveness are influenced by colour in a similar manner to that in binocular rivalry, and the frequencies of fluctuations are higher for gratings of complementary colours.     

Binocular vision enhances phase discrimination by filtering the background.

Previous studies have shown that the detectability of a noise-masked target can be enhanced under stereoscopic viewing when the target's interocular disparity differs from that of the noise. This enhanced detectability can be accounted for by a model postulating that the binocular system linearly sums the left-eye and right-eye views of a visual scene. This model also predicts enhanced phase discrimination under specifiable interocular disparities of target and noise. Two experiments were conducted in which subjects were asked to discriminate between two luminance patterns (target and foil) that differed only in phase. The target patterns were constructed by summating two vertical sinusoidal gratings in which the phase difference between the higher and the lower spatial frequency gratings was 45 degrees. The foils contained the same two component frequencies, with a phase difference of -45 degrees. Thus, targets and foils were mirror images of one another. The ability of subjects to discriminate between these stereoscopically viewed mirror-image patterns was investigated under two sets of interocular disparities: those that, according to our model, would unmask one or both spatial frequency components, and those that would leave both components masked by the noise. Phase discrimination was enhanced only when both component frequencies of the target and foil were unmasked. The implications of these findings for template-matching and phase-discrimination models of pattern discrimination are considered.