The role of a local reference in stereoscopic detection of depth relief

Vision Research

Volumn 44, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 367-376

  Petrov, Yury ^a   Glennerster, Andrew ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Binocular disparity; Gradient; Psychophysics; Stereopsis; Threshold

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEPTH PERCEPTION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; HYPOTHESIS; MODEL; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STEREOSCOPIC VISION; STIMULUS; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL STIMULATION; VISUAL THRESHOLD;

EID: 0344196833     PISSN: 00426989     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2003.09.034     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Anstis S.M., Howard I.P., Rogers B.J. A Craik-O'Brien-Cornsweet illusion for visual depth. Vision Research. 18:1978;213-217.
2. Burt P., Julesz B. Disparity gradient limit for binocular fusion. Science. 208:1980;615-617.
3. Cagenello R., Rogers B.J. Anisotropies in the perception of stereoscopic surfaces - the role of orientation disparity. Vision Research. 33:1993;2189-2201.
4. Foley J.M., Legge G.E. Contrast detection and near-threshold discrimination in human vision. Vision Research. 21:1981;1041-1053.
5. Gillam B., Flagg T., Finlay D. Evidence for disparity change as the primary stimulus for stereoscopic processing. Perception and Psychophysics. 36:1984;559-564.
6. Glennerster A., McKee S.P. Bias and sensitivity of stereo judgements in the presence of a slanted reference plane. Vision Research. 39:1999;3057-3069.
7. Glennerster A., McKee S.P., Birch M.D. Evidence of surface-based processing of binocular disparity. Current Biology. 12:2002;825-828.
8. Glennerster A., Rogers B.J., Bradshaw M.F. Stereoscopic depth constancy depends on the subject's task. Vision Research. 36:1996;3441-3456.
9. Glennerstcr A., Rogers B.J., Bradshaw M.F. Cues to viewing distance for stereoscopic depth constancy. Perception. 27:1998;1357-1365.
10. Johnston E.B. Systematic distortions of shape from stereopsis. Vision Research. 31:1991;1351-1360.
11. Koenderink J.J., van Doorn A.J. Affine structure from motion. Journal of the Optical Society of America A. 8:1991;377-385.
12. Kontsevich L.L. An ambiguous random-dot stereogram which permits continuous change of interpretation. Vision Research. 26:1986;517-519.
13. Lappin J.S., Craft W.D. Foundations of spatial vision: From retinal images to perceived shapes. Psychological Review. 107:2000;6-38.
14. Legge G.E. Sustained and transient mechanisms in human vision: Temporal and spatial properties. Vision Research. 18:1978;69-81.
15. McKee S.P., Mitchison G.J. The role of retinal correspondence in stereoscopic matching. Vision Research. 28:1988;1001-1012.
16. McKee S.P., Welch L., Taylor D.G., Bowne S.F. Finding the common bond: Stereoacuity and the other hyperacuities. Vision Research. 30:1990;879-891.
17. Mitchison G.J., McKee S.P. Interpolation in stereoscopic matching. Vision Research. 27:1987;285-294.
18. Mitchison G.J., McKee S.P. Mechanisms underlying the anisotropy of stereoscopic tilt perception. Vision Research. 30:1990;1781-1791.
19. Mitchison G.J., Westheimer G. The perception of depth in simple figures. Vision Research. 24:1984;1063-1070.
20. Mitchison G.J., Westheimer G. Viewing geometry and gradients of horizontal disparity. Blakemore C. Vision: Coding and efficiency. 1990;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
21. Nachmias J., Sansbury R.V. Grating contrast: Discrimination may be better than detection. Vision Research. 14:1974;1039-1042.
22. Ogle K.N. Note on stereoscopic acuity and observation distance. Journal of the Optical Society of America. 48:1958;794-798.
23. Parker A.J., Yang Y. Spatial properties of disparity pooling in human stereo vision. Vision Research. 29:1989;1525-1538.
24. Pelli D.G. Uncertainty explains many aspects of visual contrast detection and discrimination. Journal of the Optical Society of America. 2:1985;1508-1531.
25. Petrov Y. Disparity capture by flanking stimuli: A measure for the cooperative mechanism of stereopsis. Vision Research. 42:2002;809-813.
26. Rogers B.J., Cagenello R. Disparity curvature and the perception of three-dimensional surfaces. Nature. 339:1989;135-137.
27. Rogers B.J., Graham M. Similarities between motion parallax and stereopsis in human depth perception. Vision Research. 22:1982;261-270.
28. Rogers B.J., Graham M. Anisotropies in the perception of three-dimensional surfaces. Science. 221:1983;1409-1411.
29. Schor C., Heckmann T., Tyler W. Binocular fusion limits are independent of contrast, luminance gradient and component phases. Vision Research. 29:1989;821-835.
30. Shannon C.E. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal. 27:1948;379-423.
31. Tittle J.S., Todd J.T., Perotti V.J., Norman J.F. A hierarchical analysis of alternative representations in the perception of 3-D structure from motion and stereopsis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 21:1995;663-678.
32. Tyler C.W. Depth perception in disparity gratings. Nature. 251:1974;140-142.
33. Wallach H., Bacon J. Two forms of retinal disparity. Perception and Psychophysics. 19:1976;375-382.
34. Westheimer G. Spatial interaction in the domain of disparity signals in human stereoscopic vision. Journal of Physiology. 370:1986;619-629.
35. Westheimer G., Levi D.M. Depth attraction and repulsion of disparate foveal stimuli. Vision Research. 27:1987;1361-1368.
36. Westheimer G., McKee S.P. What prior uniocular processing is necessary for stereopsis? Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science. 18:1979;614-621.