Visuomotor memory for target location in near and far reaching spaces

The authors investigated systematic error associated with endpoints of memory-guided actions performed in near and far reaching spaces. To accomplish that objective, the authors instructed 12 participants to initiate open-loop and memory-guided reaches (0, 2,000, and 5,000 ms of visual delay) from a common start position to remembered midline targets in near (i.e., a backward reach) and far (i.e., a forward reach) reaching spaces. The results indicated that near and far reaches, respectively, over- and undershot veridical target location, and the direction-specific nature of the error was amplified in the memory-guided conditions. The latter finding represents an important aspect of the present research because it suggests that the direction-specific error identified here is related to factors arising within the sensory component of the task rather than mechanical differences in reaching direction. The authors propose that stored target information serving memory guided actions is susceptible to a compression of visual space in memory such that the egocentric distance of a remembered target is underestimated.     

A Kinematic Analysis of Goal-directed Prehension Movements Executed under Binocular,Monocular, and Memory-guided Viewing Conditions

Vision is critical for the efficient execution of prehension movements, providing information about: The location of a target object with respect to the viewer; its spatial relationship to other objects; as well as intrinsic properties of the object such as its size and orientation. This paper reports three experiments which examined the role played by binocular vision in the execution of prehension movements. Specifically, transport and grasp kinematics were examined for prehension movements executed under binocular, monocular, and no vision (memory-guided and open-loop) viewing conditions. The results demonstrated an overall advantage for reaches executed under binocular vision; movement duration and the length of the deceleration phase were longer, and movement velocity reduced, when movements were executed with monocular vision. Furthermore, the results indicated that binocular vision is particularly important during “selective” reaching, that is reaching for target objects which are accompanied by flanker objects. These results are related to recent neuro psychological investigations suggesting that stereopsis may be critical for the visual control of prehension.     

Multiple information sources in interceptive timing

This study was designed to explore the limitations of tau (τ) as an explanatory construct for the timing of interceptive action. This was achieved by examining the effects of environmental structure and binocular vision on the timing of the grasp in a simple one-handed catch. In two experiments, subjects were required to catch luminous balls of different diameters (4, 6, 8 and 10 cm) in a completely darkened room. In the first experiment the influence of the presence vs. absence of an environmental background structure (both under monocular viewing) was tested, and in the second experiment the influence of monocular vs. binocular vision was examined. It was found that irrespective of the presence of environmental structure, an effect of ball size occurred in the monocular viewing conditions. That is, in monocular viewing conditions the grasp was initiated and completed earlier for the larger balls as compared to the smaller ones, while in the binocular viewing condition subjects behaved in accordance with a constant time to contact strategy: no effects of ball size were found. It is concluded that under binocular viewing a binocular information source is used, while in the monocular viewing condition a lower order information source like image size or image velocity is probably involved.     

Monocular-contingent and binocular-contingent aftereffects

Alternate monocular and binocular exposure to complementary stimulation can yield opposite but coexisting aftereffects that are contingent on whether the test display is viewed with one eye or two eyes. The motion aftereffect was studied by adapting each eye separately to a contracting spiral and both eyes together to an expanding spiral. The stationary test spiral subsequently appeared to be expanding when viewed monocularly, but to be contracting when it was seen with both eyes open. With respect to the McCollough effect, after monocular exposure to red-vertical and green-horizontal gratings and binocular exposure to red-horizontal and green-vertical gratings, the appearance of the color of the test gratings when viewed with one eye was different from that when viewed with both eyes. Opposite, coexisting aftereffects induced by complementary stimulation can be interpreted as evidence that there are unique binocular aspects to visual function.     

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.     

The acquisition of catching under monocular and binocular conditions

The effects of binocular and monocular viewing on spatial and temporal errors in one-handed catching were investigated in two experiments. The first experiment-using expert catchers-recorded more spatial errors under the monocular than under the binocular condition. No significant differences in the number of temporal errors were apparent. In a second experiment, which paradigm, relatively poor catchers were trained under both vision conditions. Its objective was to investigate whether the superior results obtained under the binocular condition in the first experiment, for the number of catches and number of spatial errors, could be attributed simply to the fact that subjects had more experience with binocular than monocular viewing. The following results occurred after a period of training (a) a significant reduction in the number of spatial errors under the monocular condition, reaching a level similar to that under the binocular condition; (b) no significant reduction in the number of spatial errors when subjects transferred from monocular to binocular viewing, and significantly more spatial errors when subjects transferred from binocular to monocular viewing; and (c) a training-sequence effect. The latter effect indicates that subjects had more benefit from training in the sequence monocular-binocular than vice versa. These findings are discussed in the context of the strategies of specificity of learning and use of multisources.     

Some visual influences on human postural equilibrium: binocular versus monocular fixation

The importance of vision for postural equilibrium has long been known; traditionally, this visual contribution to the control of posture has been analyzed primarily in terms of optical and retinal phenomena. Recently, however, there has been some suggestion that binocular and monocular fixation of identical stimuli have differential effects. Three experiments were conducted in order to measure self-generated movement (sway during quiet standing) of the body's center of gravity while field structure, ankle proprioception, and binocular/monocular fixation were varied. Field structure was varied from total darkness, to the presence of single and multiple LEDs in the dark, to full field structure (i.e., the richness of the feed back information was varied). Ankle proprioception was varied by changing foot position from side-by-side to heel-to-toe positions. Results indicate that (1) ankle-joint input is a significant factor in reducing sway, (2) binocular fixation attenuates sway relative to monocular fixation, under otherwise identical visual conditions, and (3) this difference persists in total darkness. Taken together, the data indicate that the visual influence on postural equilibrium results from a complex synergy that receives multimodal inputs. A simple optical/retinal explanation is not sufficient.     

Adult visual experience promotes recovery of primary visual cortex from long-term monocular deprivation

Prolonged visual deprivation from early childhood to maturity is believed to cause permanent visual impairment. However, there have been case reports of substantial improvement of binocular vision in human adults following lifelong visual impairment or deprivation. These observations, together with recent findings of adult ocular dominance plasticity in rodents, led us to re-examine whether adult primary visual cortex (V1) is capable of any recovery following long-term monocular deprivation starting in development. Using mice as a model, we find that monocular deprivation from early development to mature ages (well past the critical period) severely impaired binocular vision by reducing the amplitude of responses elicited by stimulation of the deprived eye. Surprisingly, we find little effect on nondeprived eye responses. Restoration of binocular vision in mature adults yields modest but significant improvement of visual responses in V1. Remarkably, we find that when binocular vision is followed by occlusion of the nondeprived eye, visual responses in V1 recover almost fully, as measured by visual evoked potential amplitude, spatial frequency threshold, and single-unit activity. We conclude that adult V1 can recover from long-term deprivation when provided with an optimal regimen of visual experience.     

Distortions of distance and shape are not produced by a single continuous transformation of reach space

We investigated whether distortions of perceived distance and shape could be captured by a single continuous one-to-one transformation of the underlying space. In Experiment 1, the participants reached to touch points around the perimeter of spherical targets viewed at five different distances, to yield simultaneous measures of perceived distance and shape. Different participants reached while using dynamic monocular, static binocular, or dynamic binocular vision. Thin plate spline (TPS) analysis was applied so as to transform a Cartesian grid in such a way as to carry the original target points to the mean reach locations. In all cases, discontinuities appeared in the transformed grid from folding of the space. In Experiment 2, the participants reached to points that lay at the same locus in reach space, but on different portions of the visible target spheres (e.g., front vs. side). The participants reached to different locations when the points were different with respect to shape (e.g., front vs. side) but reached to the same locations when the points were the same with respect to shape (left vs. right side). TPS analysis revealed discontinuities from holes torn in the underlying space. The results show that perceived distance and perceived shape entail different distortions and cannot be captured by a single continuous transformation of reach space.     

Distortions of distance and shape are not produced by a single continuous transformation of reach space

We investigated whether distortions of perceived distance and shape could be captured by a single continuous one-to-one transformation of the underlying space. In Experiment 1, the participants reached to touch points around the perimeter of spherical targets viewed at five different distances, to yield simultaneous measures of perceived distance and shape. Different participants reached while using dynamic monocular, static binocular, or dynamic binocular vision. Thin plate spline (TPS) analysis was applied so as to transform a Cartesian grid in such a way as to carry the original target points to the mean reach locations. In all cases, discontinuities appeared in the transformed grid from folding of the space. In Experiment 2, the participants reached to points that lay at the same locus in reach space, but on different portions of the visible target spheres (e.g., front vs. side). The participants reached to different locations when the points were different with respect to shape (e.g., front vs. side) but reached to the same locations when the points were the same with respect to shape (left vs. right side). TPS analysis revealed discontinuities from holes torn in the underlying space. The results show that perceived distance and perceived shape entail different distortions and cannot be captured by a single continuous transformation of reach space.     

Some observations and measurements of the Panum phenomenon

The angular separation between the “binocular” and the “monocular” line of Panum’s limiting case was systematically varied under conditions in which the changes in seen relative depth could be quantified. Stereoscopic, equidistant, and anomalous depth localizations were seen. A criterion of variability of depth localization was utilized to differentiate the mechanism operative in determining the seen depth. When stereopsis is clearly present, depth in Panum’s limiting case is predictable and reveals a one-to-one relationship with the angle of lateral separation of the stereoscopic stimuli, i.e., the odd line cooperates in free binocular vision with both of the paired lines to give “true” stereoscopic depth. The range of angular separation over which Panum’s limiting case will give rise to stereoscopic depth is increased by free eye movements well beyond the usually reported limits of Panum’s retinal areas.     

A summary statistical representation influences perceptions but not visually or memory-guided grasping

A statistical summary representation (SSR) is a phenomenon wherein a target property (e.g., size) is encoded based on the average of the stimulus-set to which it belongs. An SSR has been demonstrated in obligatory judgment tasks; however, to our knowledge no work has examined whether it influences grasps to 3D targets. Here, participants completed a method of adjustment task, and visually and memory-guided grasps in conditions wherein differently sized 3D targets (widths: 20, 30 and 40 mm; height and depth = 10 mm) were presented with equal frequency (i.e., control) and when the smallest (i.e., 20-mm: small-target) and largest (i.e., 40-mm: large-target) targets were presented five times as often as the other targets in the stimulus-set. In the method of adjustment task, responses for the small- and large-target weighting conditions were smaller and larger than the control condition, respectively. In other words, an SSR biased perceptions in the direction of the most frequently presented target in the stimulus-set – a result consistent with the view that perceptions are supported by relative visual information laid down by the ventral visual pathway. In contrast, grip apertures were refractory to target-weighting and was a finding independent of the presence (i.e., visually guided) or absence (i.e., memory-guided) of visual feedback. Furthermore, two one-sided tests showed that peak grip apertures for the different target weighting conditions were within an equivalence boundary. Accordingly, an SSR does not influence 3D grasps and is a finding adding to a growing literature reporting that actions are supported by the absolute visuomotor networks of the dorsal visual pathway.     

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.     

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.     

Hitting the target: relatively easy, yet absolutely difficult

It is generally agreed that absolute-direction judgments require information about eye position, whereas relative-direction judgments do not. The source of this eye-position information, particularly during monocular viewing, is a matter of debate. It may be either binocular eye position, or the position of the viewing-eye only, that is crucial. Using more ecologically valid stimulus situations than the traditional LED in the dark, we performed two experiments. In experiment 1, observers threw darts at targets that were fixated either monocularly or binocularly. In experiment 2, observers aimed a laser gun at targets while fixating either the rear or the front gunsight monocularly, or the target either monocularly or binocularly. We measured the accuracy and precision of the observers' absolute- and relative-direction judgments. We found that (a) relative-direction judgments were precise and independent of phoria, and (b) monocular absolute-direction judgments were inaccurate, and the magnitude of the inaccuracy was predictable from the magnitude of phoria. These results confirm that relative-direction judgments do not require information about eye position. Moreover, they show that binocular eye-position information is crucial when judging the absolute direction of both monocular and binocular targets.     

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 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.     

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.     

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.