Binocular interaction reflected in visually evoked cortical potentials as studied with pseudorandom stimuli

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 43, Issue 10, 2002, Pages 3355-3358

  Sato, Eiju ^a   Taniai, Mariko ^a   Mizota, Atsushi ^a   Adachi Usami, Emiko ^a  

^a CHIBA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BINOCULAR VISION; ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; EVOKED VISUAL RESPONSE; FEMALE; HUMAN; LUMINANCE; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STEREOSCOPIC VISION; TECHNIQUE; VISUAL STIMULATION;

ADULT; EVOKED POTENTIALS, VISUAL; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REFERENCE VALUES; VISION, BINOCULAR; VISUAL CORTEX;

EID: 0036785841     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Lansing RW. Electroencephalographic correlates of binocular rivalry in man. Science. 1964;146:1325-1327.
2. Lehmann D, Fender DH. Monocularly evoked electroencephalogram potentials: influence of target structure presented to the other eye. Nature. 1967;215:204-205.
3. Spekreijse H, van der Tweel LH, Regan D. Interocular sustained suppression: correlations with evoked potential amplitude and distribution. Vision Res. 1972;12:521-526.
4. Brown RJ, Norcia AM. A method for investigating binocular rivalry in real-time with the steady-state VEP. Vision Res. 1997;37:2401-2408.
5. Levi DM, Manny RE. The pathophysiology of amblyopia: electrophysiological studies. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1982;388:243-263.
6. Lennerstrand G. Binocular interaction studied with visual evoked responses (VER) in humans with normal or impaired binocular vision. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh). 1978;56:628-637.
7. Srebro R. Would an evaluation of binocularity using algebraic interaction between the two eyes be modified using the pseudorandom binary sequence method? Ann NY Acad Sci. 1982;388: 628-630.
8. Fricker SJ, Sanders JJ III. Clinical studies of the evoked response to rapid random flash. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1974; 36:525-532.
9. Srebro R, Wright W. Pseudorandom sequences in the study of evoked potentials. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1982;388:98-112.
10. Srebro R. An analysis of the VEP to luminance modulation and of its nonlinearity. Vision Res. 1992;32:1395-1404.
11. Momose K, Kiyosawa M, Nemoto N, Kimura Y, Okuyama F, Senda M. Visual temporal frequency characteristics determined by pseudorandom stimuli. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999;40:50-54.
12. Sutter EE, Tran D. The field topography of ERG components in man. I: the photopic luminance response. Vision Res. 1992;32: 433-446.
13. Adachi-Usami E, Lehmann D. Monocular and binocular evoked average potential field topography: upper and lower hemiretinal stimuli. Exp Brain Res. 1983;50:341-346.
14. Regan D. Latencies of evoked potentials to flicker and to pattern speedily estimated by simultaneous method. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1976;40:654-660.
15. Zemon V, Ratliff F. Visual evoked potentials: evidence for lateral interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1982;79:5723-5726.
16. Baitch LW, Levi DM. Evidence for nonlinear binocular interactions in human visual cortex. Vision Res. 1988;28:1139-1143.
17. Zemon V, Pinkhasov E, Gordon J. Electrophysiological tests of neural models: evidence for nonlinear binocular interactions in humans. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1993;90:2975-2978.
18. Odom JV, Chao GM. Models of binocular luminance interaction evaluated using visually evoked potential and psychophysical measures: a tribute to M. Russell Halter. Int J Neurosci. 1995;80: 255-280.
19. Fricker SJ, Kuperwaser MC. Is linear analysis sufficient to reveal abnormalities of the visual system under dichoptic stimulation conditions? Ann NY Acad Sci. 1982;388:622-627.