1 |
Investigating human visual sensitivity to binocular motion-in-depth for anti- and de-correlated random-dot stimuliGiesel, M., Wade, A.R., Bloj, Marina, Harris, J.M. 11 January 2018 (has links)
Yes / Motion-in-depth can be detected by using two different types of binocular cues: change
of disparity (CD) and inter-ocular velocity differences (IOVD). To investigate the underlying
detection mechanisms, stimuli can be constructed that isolate these cues or contain both (FULL cue).
Two different methods to isolate the IOVD cue can be employed: anti-correlated (aIOVD) and
de-correlated (dIOVD) motion signals. While both types of stimuli have been used in studies
investigating the perception of motion-in-depth, for the first time, we explore whether both stimuli
isolate the same mechanism and how they differ in their relative efficacy. Here, we set out to directly
compare aIOVD and dIOVD sensitivity by measuring motion coherence thresholds. In accordance
with previous results by Czuba et al. (2010), we found that motion coherence thresholds were similar
for aIOVD and FULL cue stimuli for most participants. Thresholds for dIOVD stimuli, however,
differed consistently from thresholds for the two other cues, suggesting that aIOVD and dIOVD
stimuli could be driving different visual mechanisms.
|
2 |
Sensitivity to velocity- and disparity based cues to motion-in-depth with and without spared stereopsis in binocular visual impairmentMaloney, R.T., Kaestner, M., Bruce, Alison, Bloj, Marina, Harris, J.M., Wade, A.R. 31 July 2018 (has links)
Yes / Purpose: Two binocular sources of information serve motion-in-depth (MID) perception:
changes in disparity over time (CD), and interocular velocity differences (IOVD). While CD
requires the computation of small spatial disparities, IOVD could be computed from a much
lower-resolution signal. IOVD signals therefore might still be available under conditions of
binocular vision impairment (BVI) with limited or no stereopsis, e.g. amblyopia.
Methods: Sensitivity to CD and IOVD was measured in adults who had undergone therapy
to correct optical misalignment or amblyopia in childhood (n=16), as well as normal vision
controls with good stereoacuity (n=8). Observers discriminated the interval containing a
smoothly-oscillating MID “test” stimulus from a “control” stimulus in a two-interval forced
choice (2IFC) paradigm.
Results: Of the BVI observers with no static stereoacuity (n=9), one displayed evidence for
sensitivity to IOVD only, while there was otherwise no sensitivity for either CD or IOVD in
the group. Generally, BVI observers with measurable stereoacuity (n=7) displayed a pattern
resembling the control group: showing a similar sensitivity for both cues. A neutral-density
(ND) filter placed in front of the fixing eye in a subset of BVI observers did not improve
performance.
Conclusions: In one BVI observer there was preserved sensitivity to IOVD but not CD,
though overall only those BVI observers with at least gross stereopsis were able to detect
disparity-based or velocity-based cues to MID. The results imply that these logically distinct
information sources are somehow coupled, and in some cases BVI observers with no
stereopsis may still retain sensitivity to IOVD. / UK Biotechnology and Biological 498 Sciences Research Council (BBSRC): BB/M002543/1 (Alex R. Wade) BB/M001660/1 (Julie 499 M. Harris) and BB/M001210/1 (Marina Bloj)
|
Page generated in 0.0244 seconds