The effects of binocular and motion-generated information on the perception of depth and height

The perception of distance and size in the presence of optical gradient information was investigated under four viewing conditions—binocular view with and without head motion, and monocular view with and without head motion. Subjects (60 adults) matched distance intervals (from 15 to 127 cm) and heights of a target triangle (from 5 to 15 cm) by adjusting the length of a metal tape. Both linear and power functions were fitted to each individual’s distance judgments, and the competing perceptual models were compared. For both models, it was found that binocular information was sufficient to specify relative, but not absolute, distance, that monocular information was sufficient to specify an orderly relation between target distance and judgment but not absolute distance, that average error was less in the binocular conditions, and that perceived distance was not affected in either condition by the addition of head motion. The analysis of size judgments revealed that monocular and binocular judgments did not differ, that matches made with and without head motion did not differ, and that, in all conditions, matches exceeded target heights by an average 30% to 40%. Judged size was also analyzed as a function of target distance. In all conditions but monocular view with head motion, the effect of distance was to increase size judgments. The distance judgments support the hypothesis (Purdy, 1958) that the binocular stimulus carries information that the monocular stimulus does not; they fail to support the hypothesis (Gibson, 1966) that observer motion adds information to the static stimulus. The size judgments support neither hypothesis but suggest an independence of perceived size from perceived distance.     

How is motion disparity integrated with binocular disparity in depth perception?

Two experiments presented motion disparity conflicting with binocular disparity to examine how these cues determined apparent depth order (convex, concave) and depth magnitude. In each experiment, 8 subjects estimated the depth order and depth magnitude. The first experiment showed the following. (1) The visual system used one of these cues exclusively in selecting a depth order for each display. (2) The visual system integrated the depth magnitude information from these cues by a weighted additive fashion if it selected the binocular disparity in depth order perception and if the depth magnitude specified by motion disparity was small relative to that specified by binocular disparity. (3) The visual system ignored the depth magnitude information of binocular disparity if it selected the motion disparity in depth order perception. The second experiment showed that these three points were consistent whether the subject’s head movement or object movement generated motion disparity.     

The backward inclination of a surface defined by empirical corresponding points

Three experiments were conducted to investigate whether a locus of binocular correspondence extends eccentrically from the vertical horopter. In experiment 1, we investigated whether the backward inclination of the vertical horopter was manifested in the angle at which readers prefer to orient the page. All observers preferred a page inclined backwards to any other orientation. This backward inclination was less than predicted from previous psychophysical reports, however. In experiment 2, we investigated the extent of binocular correspondence, defined by minimal apparent interocular horizontal motion, in the central 24 deg of the binocular field. Our data define a planar surface inclined top-away from the observer as a locus from which psychophysical corresponding points are stimulated. In experiment 3, we measured vertical adjustments required to eliminate apparent vertical motion. Together, the pattern of results from experiments 2 and 3 is most consistent with a planar surface, inclined top-away from the observer. This is consistent with Helmholtz's account of the backward inclination of the vertical horopter and expands the locus of zero horizontal disparity from a single line in the median plane to eccentric loci extending at least +/- 12 deg in the central binocular field.     

Stereoillusory motion concomitant with lateral head movements

Stationary objects in a stereogram can appear to move when viewed with lateral head movements. This illusory motion can be explained by the motion-distance invariance hypothesis, which states that illusory motion covaries with perceived depth in accordance with the geometric relationship between the position of the stereo stimuli and the head. We examined two predictions based on the hypothesis. In Experiment 1, illusory motion was studied while varying the magnitude of binocular disparity and the magnitude of lateral head movement, holding viewing distance constant. In Experiment 2, illusory motion was studied while varying binocular disparity and viewing distance, holding magnitude of head movement constant. Ancillary measures of perceived depth, perceived viewing distance, and perceived magnitude of lateral head movement were also obtained. The results from the two experiments show that the extent of illusory motion varies as a function of perceived depth, supporting the motion-distance invariance hypothesis. The results also show that the extent of illusory motion is close to that predicted from the geometry in crossed disparity conditions, whereas it is greater than the predicted motion in uncrossed disparity conditions. Furthermore, predictions based on perceptual variables were no more accurate than predictions based on geometry.     

Relationship between binocular disparity and motion parallax in surface detection

The ability to detect surfaces was studied in a multiple-cue condition in which binocular disparity and motion parallax could specify independent depth configurations. On trials on which binocular disparity and motion parallax were presented together, either binocular disparity or motion parallax could indicate a surface in one of two intervals; in the other interval, both sources indicated a volume of random points. Surface detection when the two sources of information were present and compatible was not better than detection in baseline conditions, in which only one source of information was present. When binocular disparity and motion specified incompatible depths, observers’ ability to detect a surface was severely impaired if motion indicated a surface but binocular disparity did not. Performance was not as severely degraded when binocular disparity indicated a surface and motion did not. This dominance of binocular disparity persisted in the presence of foreknowledge about which source of information would be relevant.     

BINOCULAR RIVALRY AS A FUNCTION OF INCONGRUITY IN MEANING

This is the third of a series of three papers dealing with semantics of facial expressions. The purpose of this experiment was to determine whether the ratings of two stimulus inputs on semantic differential scales would predict the experience of binocular rivalry. The stimuli used were five full-face photographs of a man expressing different emotions. These stimuli were rated on the semantic differential and all possible pairs of these stimuli were used as stereograms. It was hypothesized that semantically incongruous stimulus inputs would lead to binocular rivalry and that congruous ones would lead to an absence of rivalry. The hypothesis was supported.     

How owls structure visual information

Recent studies on perceptual organization in humans claim that the ability to represent a visual scene as a set of coherent surfaces is of central importance for visual cognition. We examined whether this surface representation hypothesis generalizes to a non-mammalian species, the barn owl (Tyto alba). Discrimination transfer combined with random-dot stimuli provided the appropriate means for a series of two behavioural experiments with the specific aims of (1) obtaining psychophysical measurements of figure–ground segmentation in the owl, and (2) determining the nature of the information involved. In experiment 1, two owls were trained to indicate the presence or absence of a central planar surface (figure) among a larger region of random dots (ground) based on differences in texture. Without additional training, the owls could make the same discrimination when figure and ground had reversed luminance, or were camouflaged by the use of uniformly textured random-dot stereograms. In the latter case, the figure stands out in depth from the ground when positional differences of the figure in two retinal images are combined (binocular disparity). In experiment 2, two new owls were trained to distinguish three-dimensional objects from holes using random-dot kinematograms. These birds could make the same discrimination when information on surface segmentation was unexpectedly switched from relative motion to half-occlusion. In the latter case, stereograms were used that provide the impression of stratified surfaces to humans by giving unpairable image features to the eyes. The ability to use image features such as texture, binocular disparity, relative motion, and half-occlusion interchangeably to determine figure–ground relationships suggests that in owls, as in humans, the structuring of the visual scene critically depends on how indirect image information (depth order, occlusion contours) is allocated between different surfaces. Electronic Publication     

The binocular representation of uniform motion

In the model of motion perception proposed by Swanston, Wade, and Day (1987, Perception 16 143-159) it was suggested that retinocentric motion and eye movement information are combined independently for each eye, to give left and right orbitocentric representations of movement. The weighted orbitocentric values are then added, to give a single agocentric representation. It is shown that for a physical motion observed without pursuit eye movements this formulation predicts a reduction in the perceived extent of motion with monocular as opposed to binocular viewing. This prediction was tested, and shown to be incorrect. Accordingly, a modification of the model is proposed, in which the left and right retinocentric signals are weighted according to the presence or absence of stimulation, and combined to give a binocular retinocentric representation. In a similar way left-eye and right-eye position signals are combined to give a single binocular eye movement signal for version. This is then added to the binocular retinocentric signal to give the egocentric representation. This modification provides a unified account of both static visual direction and movement perception.     

The temporal course of suppression during binocular rivalry

Orthogonally oriented sinusoidal luminance gratings were dichoptically presented to the observers' left and right eyes. During the subsequent binocular rivalry, a small target was briefly presented (4AFC) to probe the strength of interocular suppression at various temporal latencies. Both stationary and moving rivalrous patterns were investigated. The purpose of experiment 1 was to compare the temporal characteristics of stationary and motion rivalry (0 and 1.2 deg s-1), while that of experiment 2 was to examine rivalry suppression for higher speeds (2 and 4 deg s-1). In all cases, it was found that the strength of suppression remained essentially constant throughout a single phase of binocular rivalry. The results of the investigation also revealed that moving rivalrous patterns lead to greater magnitudes of interocular suppression than static patterns. Despite these differences in the strength of suppression, the results of both experiments show that the temporal characteristics of motion and static rivalry are essentially identical.     

Influences of motion and depth on brightness induction: an illusory transparency effect?

To experiments were performed to investigate whether motion and binocular disparity influence brightness induction, and whether the effects of motion and binocular disparity, if any, interact with each other. In order to introduce motion, textured backgrounds were used as the inducing field. The results showed that motion and/or crossed disparity reduce brightness induction, whereas uncrossed disparity increases it. The effect of motion and the effect of disparity are independent of each other and additive, which suggests that, to the extent that brightness induction reflects segmentation of objects, motion and binocular disparity serve independently to segment objects from their background. The difference between the effects of crossed and uncrossed disparity can be explained by what we call 'illusory transparency'.     

The tower experiment and the Copernican revolution

During the Copernican revolution the supporters of the Ptolemaic theory argued that the tower experiment refuted the Copernican hypothesis of the (diurnal) motion of the earth, but was in agreement with the Ptolemaic theory. In his defence of the Copernican theory Galileo argued that the experiment was in agreement both with Copernican and Ptolemaic theory. The reason for these different views of the same experiment was not that the two theories were incommensurable, as Paul Feyerabend argues, but that Galileo introduced a new theory of motion which he used as an auxiliary hypothesis in his discussion of the tower experiment, while those defending the Ptolemaic theory used the old Aristotelian theory of motion. Already before the Copernican revolution the Aristotelian theory of motion was criticized by philosophers in Paris, who suggested the impetus theory of motion. The later versions of this theory had the consequence that the tower experiment no longer refuted the hypothesis of the (diurnal) motion of the earth. Thus the impetus theory removed an old and important objection to the heliocentric theory. Galileo's inertial dynamics had the same function in the discussion of the tower experiment.     

Mobility of normal observers under conditions of reduced visual input.

The importance in mobility performance of the rate of presentation of visual information, binocular versus monocular vision, the use of multiple rather than single reference points, and local motion parallax was investigated in two experiments. In each experiment ten subjects walked a triangular mobility course in a totally darkened room; the only visible targets were light emitting diodes (LEDs), mounted on poles, at the apices of the triangle. The LEDs were mounted so that one or two could be used in a trial; if two were used the distance between them was varied horizontally (in experiment 1) and vertically (in experiment 2). The subjects walked around the course under a range of conditions, including two 'optimal trials' in full light. The LEDs were flashed for 1 ms at frequencies of 0.5, 1 and 5 Hz in experiment 1 and at 1 and 5 Hz in experiment 2. Mobility was measured with the use of an ultrasonic locator system which measured the subject's position on the course 10 times per second. The mean velocity of the subject in traversing the course was significantly reduced when the flash rate was slower, when the subject had one eye occluded, or when there was only one LED on the pole; when the spacing between the LEDs was varied, either vertically or horizontally performance was unaffected. These results imply that the frequency of updating of visual information is important in determining mobility performance, as are binocular cues, but that local motion parallax is not important. The number of LEDs on each pole had a significant effect on mobility performance an 'object' (two lights) gave more information than a point reference.     

无意识信息加工中的“完型”——无意识捆绑假说的新证据

采用连续闪烁范式(Continuous Flash Suppression,CFS)考察了无意识状态下完型能否发生.研究通过2(线条完整性)×2(意义破坏)×2(熟悉性)的被试内实验设计考察了8种条件下图片的突破抑制时间(Suppression Time,ST).结果发现:线条完整和意义未破坏的图片能更快地克服噪音图片的抑制进入意识;熟悉性不影响突破抑制时间.重要的是,不完整的图片也可以出现意义破坏效应.这表明即使在被抑制的状态下,不完整图形的信息也能够传达至与完型相关的高级视觉区域形成客体表征.研究为无意识捆绑假说(The Unconscious Binding Hypothesis)提供了新的实验证据.     

Binocular contrast interactions in two-frame motion discrimination

Previous studies have shown that two-frame motion detection thresholds are elevated if one frame's contrast is raised, despite the increase in average contrast--the "contrast paradox". In this study, we investigated if such contrast interactions occurred at a monocular or binocular site of visual processing. Two-frame motion direction discrimination thresholds were measured for motion frames that were presented binocularly, dichoptically or interocularly. Thresholds for each presentation condition were measured for motion frames that comprised either matched or unmatched contrasts. The results showed that contrast mechanisms producing the contrast paradox combine contrast signals from both eyes prior to motion computation. Furthermore, the results are consistent with the existence of monocular and binocular contrast gain control mechanisms that coexist either as combined or independent systems.     

The appearance of surfaces specified by motion parallax and binocular disparity

The experiments reported in this paper were designed to investigate how depth information from binocular disparity and motion parallax cues is integrated in the human visual system. Observers viewed simulated 3-D corrugated surfaces that translated to and fro across their line of sight. The depth of the corrugations was specified by either motion parallax, or binocular disparities, or some combination of the two. The amount of perceived depth in the corrugations was measured using a matching technique.

A monocularly viewed surface specified by parallax alone was seen as a rigid, corrugated surface translating along a fronto-parallel path. The perceived depth of the corrugations increased monotonically with the amount of parallax motion, just as if observers were viewing an equivalent real surface that produced the same parallax transformation. With binocular viewing and zero disparities between the images seen by the two eyes, the perceived depth was only about half of that predicted by the monocular cue. In addition, this binocularly viewed surface appeared to rotate about a vertical axis as it translated to and fro. With other combinations of motion parallax and binocular disparity, parallax only affected the perceived depth when the disparity gradients of the corrugations were shallow. The discrepancy between the parallax and disparity signals was typically resolved by an apparent rotation of the surface as it translated to and fro. The results are consistent with the idea that the visual system attempts to minimize the discrepancies between (1) the depth signalled by disparity and that required by a particular interpretation of the parallax transformation and (2) the amount of rotation required by that interpretation and the amount of rotation signalled by other cues in the display.     

Binocular stereopsis without spatial disparity

Binocular stereopsis has traditionally been studied mainly under static viewing conditions. There has consequently been the tendency to view binocular stereopsis only in terms of the pickup of purely spatial (time-frozen) disparity. However, whenever there is movement of objects or the 0, the structure of the light entering each eye undergoes continuous change, and so a different type of disparity—kinetic disparity—is made potentially available to the binocular system. That kinetic disparity can, in fact, be picked up is shown by the present experiment, in which there was no spatial disparity information available about the three-dimensional motion path of an object; only kinetic disparity information was available. This suggests that a clear distinction should be made between binocular-static and binocular-kinetic space perception.     

Measurement of visual aftereffects and inferences about binocular mechanisms in human vision

There is conflicting evidence concerning the characteristics of binocular channels in the human visual system with respect to the existence of a 'pure' binocular channel that responds only to simultaneous stimulation of both eyes. Four experiments were conducted to resolve these discrepancies and to evaluate the evidence for the existence of such an exclusive binocular channel. In the first three studies, tilt aftereffects were measured after monocular adaptation. The relative sizes of the direct, interocularly transferred, and binocular aftereffects were not influenced by the configuration of the adapting pattern (experiment 1), or by the eye used for adaptation (experiment 2). There were also consistent interobserver differences in the relative sizes of the aftereffect seen after monocular adaptation (experiment 3). Taken together, these data raise questions about the appropriateness of a monocular adaptation paradigm for evaluating the presence of a pure binocular channel in observers with normal binocular vision. In experiment 4, in which the paradigm of alternating monocular adaptation was used, data were obtained that are consistent with the presence of a pure binocular channel.     

The subliminal perception of movement and the 'suppression' in binocular rivalry.

An analogy is drawn between the perceptual limitation that characterizes the dichotic listening paradigm and the 'suppression' that occurs in binocular rivalry when different stimuli are presented to the two eyes. An experiment is reported which focuses on the fate of the information residing in a suppressed eye (unattended channel) during binocular rivalry. It is demonstrated that the temporal course of rivalry is sensitive to the presence of a subliminal moving stimulus within the currently suppressed field. The effects are seen to confirm a literal interpretation of Levelt's (1966) thesis which relates changes in the 'stimulus strength' of a rivalling field to subsequent changes in the temporal course of the phenomenon. This interpretation is consistent with the hypothesis that, despite phenomenal suppression, a full analysis is undertaken on the currently non-dominant stimulus. The data are related to models of selective attention, and to the notion that there are parallel visual systems.     

Planar motion permits perception of metric structure in stereopsis

A fundamental problem in the study of spatial perception concerns whether and how vision might acquire information about the metric structure of surfaces in three-dimensional space from motion and from stereopsis. Theoretical analyses have indicated that stereoscopic perceptions of metric relations in depth require additional information about egocentric viewing distance; and recent experiments by James Todd and his colleagues have indicated that vision acquires only affine but not metric structure from motion—that is, spatial relations ambiguous with regard to scale in depth. The purpose of the present study was to determine whether the metric shape of planar stereoscopic forms might be perceived from congruence under planar rotation. In Experiment 1, observers discriminated between similar planar shapes (ellipses) rotating in a plane with varying slant from the frontal-parallel plane. Experimental conditions varied the presence versus absence of binocular disparities, magnification of the disparity scale, and moving versus stationary patterns. Shape discriminations were accurate in all conditions with moving patterns and were near chance in conditions with stationary patterns; neither the presence nor the magnification of binocular disparities had any reliable effect. In Experiment 2, accuracy decreased as the range of rotation decreased from 80° to 10°. In Experiment 3, small deviations from planarity of the motion produced large decrements in accuracy. In contrast with the critical role of motion in shape discrimination, motion hindered discriminations of the binocular disparity scale in Experiment 4. In general, planar motion provides an intrinsic metric scale that is independent of slant in depth and of the scale of binocular disparities. Vision is sensitive to this intrinsic optical metric.     

Is there an auditory analogue to Fechner's paradox in binaural loudness perception?

In binocular brightness perception a phenomenon called Fechner's paradox can be observed. This paradox implies non-monotonicities in the psychometric functions of binocular brightness. Lehky (1983) proposed a model that describes such non-monotonicities. He suggested that Fechner's paradox also exists in binaural loudness perception. However, until now no sufficient data have been collected to test this hypothesis. Therefore, an experiment was conducted in which 36 psychometric functions were obtained using binaural stimuli in the range of intensities in which Fechner's paradox supposedly occurs. As a result, no significant non-monotonicities were found. However, it is shown that jnds derived from the psychometric functions contradict predictions derived from the limited binaural additivity model of Gigerenzer and Strube (1983).