The Stereoscopic Anisotropy Develops During Childhood
Loading...
Download
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication date
2016
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Citations
Exportar
Citation
1. Julesz B. Binocular depth perception of computer-generated patterns. Bell Syst Tech J. 1960;39:1125–1162.
2. Bradshaw MF, Rogers BJ. Sensitivity to horizontal and vertical corrugations defined by binocular disparity. Vision Res. 1999; 39:3049–3056.
3. Bradshaw MF, Hibbard PB, Parton AD, Rose D, Langley K. Surface orientation, modulation frequency and the detection and perception of depth defined by binocular disparity and motion parallax. Vision Res. 2006;46:2636–2644.
4. Serrano-Pedraza I, Brash C, Read JC. Testing the horizontalvertical stereo anisotropy with the critical-band masking paradigm. J Vis. 2013;13(11).
5. Serrano-Pedraza I, Read JC. Multiple channels for horizontal, but only one for vertical corrugations? A new look at the stereo anisotropy. J Vis. 2010;10(12):10. The Stereoscopic Anisotropy Develops During Childhood IOVS j March 2016 j Vol. 57 j No. 3 j 969 Downloaded From: http://iovs.arvojournals.org/pdfaccess.ashx?url=/data/Journals/IOVS/935065/ on 04/12/2016
6. van der Willigen RF, Harmening WM, Vossen S, Wagner H. Disparity sensitivity in man and owl: psychophysical evidence for equivalent perception of shape-from-stereo. J Vis. 2010; 10(1):10.
7. Rogers BJ, Graham ME. Anisotropies in the perception of three-dimensional surfaces. Science. 1983;221:1409–1411.
8. Mitchison GJ, McKee SP. Mechanisms underlying the anisotropy of stereoscopic tilt perception. Vision Res. 1990;30:1781–1791.
9. Gillam B, Ryan C. Perspective, orientation disparity, and anisotropy in stereoscopic slant perception. Perception. 1992; 21:427–439.
10. Cagenello R, Rogers BJ. Anisotropies in the perception of stereoscopic surfaces: the role of orientation disparity. Vision Res. 1993;33:2189–2201.
11. Hibbard PB, Bradshaw MF, Langley K, Rogers BJ. The stereoscopic anisotropy: individual differences and underlying mechanisms. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2002;28: 469–476.
12. Witz N, Hess RF. Mechanisms underlying global stereopsis in fovea and periphery. Vision Res. 2013;87:10–21.
13. Witz N, Zhou J, Hess RF. Similar mechanisms underlie the detection of horizontal and vertical disparity corrugations. PloS One. 2014;9:e84846.
14. Tyler CW, Kontsevich LL. Stereoprocessing of cyclopean depth images: horizontally elongated summation fields. Vision Res. 2001;41:2235–2243.
15. Pelli DG. The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. Spat Vis. 1997;10:437– 442.
16. Brainard DH. The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spat Vis. 1997;10: 433–436.
17. Kleiner M, Brainard D, Pelli D. What’s new in Psychtoolbox-3? In: Perception. Arezzo, Italy: 30th European Conference on Visual Perception; August 27–31, 2007. Abstract 14.
18. Pentland A. Maximum likelihood estimation: the best PEST. Percept Psychophys. 1980;28:377–379.
19. Emerson PL. Observations on maximum-likelihood and Bayesian methods of forced-choice sequential threshold estimation. Percept Psychophys. 1986;39:151–153.
20. King-Smith PE, Grigsby SS, Vingrys AJ, Benes SC, Supowit A. Efficient and unbiased modifications of the QUEST threshold method: theory, simulations, experimental evaluation and practical implementation. Vision Res. 1994;34:885–912.
21. Serrano-Pedraza I, Manjunath V, Osunkunle O, Clarke MP, Read JC. Visual suppression in intermittent exotropia during binocular alignment. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52: 2352–2364.
22. Anderson AJ. Utility of a dynamic termination criterion in the ZEST adaptive threshold method. Vision Res. 2003;43:165– 170.
23. Bohr I, Read JC. Stereoacuity with Frisby and revised FD2 stereo tests. PLoS One. 2013;8:e82999.
24. Zaroff CM, Knutelska M, Frumkes TE. Variation in stereoacuity: normative description, fixation disparity, and the roles of aging and gender. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:891– 900.
25. Odell NV, Hatt SR, Leske DA, Adams WE, Holmes JM. The effect of induced monocular blur on measures of stereoacuity. J AAPOS. 2009;13:136–141.
26. Campbell FW, Kulikowski JJ, Levinson J. The effect of orientation on the visual resolution of gratings. J Physiol (Lond). 1966;187:427–436.
27. Daugman JG. Spatial visual channels in the Fourier domain. Vision Res. 1984;24:891–910.
28. Switkes E, Mayer MJ, Sloan JA. Spatial frequency analysis of the visual environment: anisotropy and the carpentered environment hypothesis. Vision Res. 1978;18:1393–1399.
29. Keil MS, Cristobal G. Separating the chaff from the wheat: ´ Possible origins of the oblique effect. J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 2000;17:697–710.
30. Hansen BC, Essock EA. A horizontal bias in human visual processing of orientation and its correspondence to the structural components of natural scenes. J Vis. 2004;4(12): 1044–1060.
31. Essock EA, DeFord JK, Hansen BC, Sinai MJ. Oblique stimuli are seen best (not worst!) in naturalistic broad-band stimuli: a horizontal effect. Vision Res. 2003;43:1329–1335.
32. Sprague WW, Cooper EA, Tosic I, Banks MS. Stereopsis is adaptative for the natural environment. Sci Adv. 2015;1.
33. Hirsch HVB, Spinelli DN. Visual experience modifies distribution of horizontally and vertically oriented receptive fields in cats. Science. 1970;168:869–871.
34. Blakemore C, Cooper GF. Development of the brain depends on the visual environment. Nature. 1970;228:477–478.
35. Fox R, Patterson R, Francis EL. Stereoacuity in young children. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1986;27:598–600.
36. Ciner EB, Schanel-Klitsch E, Herzberg C. Stereoacuity development: 6 months to 5 years. A new tool for testing and screening. Optom Vis Sci. 1996;73:43–48.
37. Oduntan AO, Al-Ghamdi M, Al-Dosari H. Randot stereoacuity norms in a population of Saudi Arabian children. Clin Exp Optom. 1998;81:193–197.
38. Romano PE, Romano JA, Puklin JE. Stereoacuity development in children with normal binocular single vision. Am J Ophthalmol. 1975;79:966–971.
39. Cooper J, Feldman J, Medlin D. Comparing stereoscopic performance of children using the Titmus, TNO, and Randot stereo tests. J Am Optom Assoc. 1979;50:821–825.
40. Sloper JJ, Collins AD. Reduction in binocular enhancement of the visual-evoked potential during development accompanies increasing stereoacuity. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 1998;35:154–158.
41. Schmid M, Largo RH. Visual acuity and stereopsis between the ages of 5 and 10 years. A cross-sectional study. Eur J Pediatr. 1986;145:475–479.
42. Costa MF, Moreira SM, Hamer RD, Ventura DF. Effects of age and optical blur on real depth stereoacuity. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2010;30:660–666.
43. Garnham L, Sloper JJ. Effect of age on adult stereoacuity as measured by different types of stereotest. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90:91–95.
44. Brown B, Yap MK, Fan WC. Decrease in stereoacuity in the seventh decade of life. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1993;13:138– 142.
45. Rogers BJ, Graham M. Similarities between motion parallax and stereopsis in human depth perception. Vision Res. 1982; 22:261–270.
46. Allenmark F, Read JCA. Spatial stereoresolution for depth corrugations may be set in primary visual cortex. PLoS Comput Biol. 2011;7:e1002142.
47. Banks MS, Gepshtein S, Landy MS. Why is spatial stereoresolution so low? J Neurosci. 2004;24:2077–2089.
48. Braddick O, Atkinson J. Development of human visual function. Vision Res. 2011;51:1588–1609.
49. Ciner EB, Schanel-Klitsch E, Scheiman M. Stereoacuity development in young children. Optom Vis Sci. 1991;68: 533–536.
50. Hohmann A, Haase W. Development of visual line acuity in humans. Opthalmic Res. 1982;14:107–112.
51. Giaschi D, Narasimhan S, Solski A, Harrison E, Wilcox LM. On the typical development of stereopsis: fine and coarse processing. Vision Res. 2013;89:65–71.
Abstract
PURPOSE
Human vision has a puzzling stereoscopic anisotropy: horizontal depth corrugations are easier to detect than vertical depth corrugations. To date, little is known about the function or the underlying mechanism responsible for this anisotropy. Here, we aim to find out whether this anisotropy is independent of age. To answer this, we compare detection thresholds for horizontal and vertical depth corrugations as a function of age.
METHODS
The depth corrugations were defined solely by the horizontal disparity of random dot patterns. The disparities depicted a horizontal or vertical sinusoidal depth corrugation of spatial frequency 0.1 cyc/deg. Detection thresholds were obtained using Bayesian adaptive staircases from a total of 159 subjects aged from 3 to 73 years. For each participant we computed the anisotropy index, defined as the log10-ratio of the detection threshold for vertical corrugations divided by that for horizontal.
RESULTS
Anisotropy index was highly variable between individuals but was positive in 87% of the participants. There was a significant correlation between anisotropy index and log-age (r = 0.21, P = 0.008) mainly driven by a significant difference between children and adults. In 67 children aged 3 to 13 years, the mean anisotropy index was 0.34 ± 0.38 (mean ± SD, meaning that vertical thresholds were on average 2.2 times the horizontal ones), compared with 0.59 ± 0.55 in 84 adults aged 18 to 73 years (vertical 3.9 times horizontal). This was mainly driven by a decline in the sensitivity to vertical corrugations. Children had poorer stereoacuity than adults, but had similar sensitivity to adults for horizontal corrugations and were actually more sensitive than adults to vertical corrugations.
CONCLUSIONS
The fact that adults show stronger stereo anisotropy than children raises the possibility that visual experience plays a critical role in developing and strengthening the stereo anisotropy.