The Psychoanatomy of Binocular Single Vision

  • Jeremy M. Wolfe
Part of the Perspectives in Vision Research book series (PIVR)


Humans, in common with the rest of the vertebrates, have two eyes. In common with a significant subset of the vertebrates, notably predators, the visual fields of those two eyes overlap to a substantial extent. This arrangement offers a number of substantial benefits. Binocular overlap makes possible stereoscopic depth perception (Wheatstone, 1938). Many visual tasks are performed better with two eyes than one (Blake and Fox, 1974; Blake et al., 1981 ; Jones and Lee, 1981). Two eyes together have a larger field of view than one eye, even in animals with frontal eyes. Finally, two eyes provide insurance against the loss of one eye.


Binocular Vision Binocular Rivalry Interocular Transfer Figural Aftereffect Binocular Fusion 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anderson, J. D., Bechtoldt, H. P., and Gregory, L. D., 1978, Binocular integration in line rivalry, Bull. Psychonom. Soc. 11:399–402.Google Scholar
  2. Anstis, S. M., and Duncan, K., 1983, Separate motion aftereffects from each eye and from both eyes, Vision Res. 23:161–170.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asher, H., 1953, Suppression theory of binocular vision, Br. J. Ophthalmol. 37:37–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blake, R., 1977, Threshold conditions for binocular rivalry, J. Exp. Psychol. 3:251–257.Google Scholar
  5. Blake, R., 1989, A neural theory of binocular rivalry, Psychol. Rev. 96:145–167.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blake, R., and Boothroyd, K., 1985, The precedence of binocular fusion over binocular rivalry, Percept. Psychophys. 37:114–124.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blake, R., and Bravo, M., 1985, Binocular rivalry suppression interferes with phase adaptation, Percept. Psychophys. 38:277–280.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blake, R., and Camisa, J., 1978, Is binocular vision always monocular? Science 200:1497–1499.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blake, R., and Fox, R., 1972, Interocular transfer of adaptation to spatial frequency during retinal ischaemia, Nature [New Biol] 240:76–77.Google Scholar
  10. Blake, R., and Fox, R., 1973, The psychophysical inquiry onto binocular summation, Percept. Psychophys. 14:161–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blake, R., and Fox, R., 1974, Adaptation to invisible gratings and the site of binocular rivalry suppression, Nature 249:488–490.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Blake, R., andO’Shea, R. P., 1988, “Abnormal fusion” of stereopsis and binocular rivalry, Psychol. Rev. 95:151–154.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Blake, R., and Overton, R., 1979, The site of binocular rivalry suppression, Perception 8:143–152.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Blake, R., Overton, R., and Lema-Stern, S., 1981, Interocular transfer of visual aftereffects, J. Exp. Psychol. 88:327–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Blakemore, C., and Julesz, B., 1971, Stereoscopic depth aftereffect produced without monocular cues, Science 171:286–288.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Boring, E. G., 1942, Sensation and Perception in the History of Psychology, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Bower, T. G. R., and Haley, L. J., 1964, Temporal effects in binocular vision, Psychon. Sci. 1:409–420.Google Scholar
  18. Braddick, O., Campbell, F. W., and Atkinson, J., 1978, Channels in vision: Basic aspects, in: Perception: Handbook of Sensory Physiology (R. Held, W. H. Leibowitz, and H.-L. Teuber, eds.), 3–38, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  19. Buckley, D., Frisby, J. P., and Mayhew, J. E. W., 1988, Interaction of texture and stereo cues in the perception of surface slant: Evidence for surface orientation anisotropy in cue integration, Perception 17:A384.Google Scholar
  20. Bulthoff, H. H., and Mallot, H., 1988, Integration of depth modules: Local and global depth measurements, IOVS ARVO [Suppl.] 29:400.Google Scholar
  21. Bulthoff, H. H., and Mallot, H. A., 1988, Integration of depth modules: Stereo and shading, J. Opt. Soc. Am. [A] 5:1749–1758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Burian, H. M., and Noorden, G. K., 1974, Binocular Vision and Ocular Motility, C. V. Mosby, St. Louis.Google Scholar
  23. Campbell, F. W., and Maffei, L., 1971, The tilt aftereffect: A fresh look, Vision Res. 11:833–840.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cavanaugh, P., and Favreau, O. E., 1985, Color and luminance share a common motion pathway, Vision Res. 25:1595–1601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cavanaugh, P., Tyler, C. W., and Favreau, O. E., 1984, Perceived velocity of moving chromatic gratings, J. Opt. Soc. Am. [A] 1:893–899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Cogan, A. I., 1982, Monocular sensitivity during binocular viewing, Vision Res. 22:1–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Cogan, R., 1973, Distributions of durations of perception in the binocular rivalry of contours, J. Gen. Psychol. 89:297–304.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Cogan, R., and Goldstein, A. G., 1972, Reporting fragmentations in the binocular rivalry of contours, Am. J. Psychol. 85:569–584.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Crabus, H., and Stadler, M., 1973, An investigation of the localization of the perceptual process: Figurai aftereffects under binocular-rivalry conditions, Perception, 2:67–77.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Creed, R. S., 1935, Observations on binocular fusion and rivalry, J. Physiol. (Lond.) 84:381–392.Google Scholar
  31. Engel, E., 1958, Binocular fusion of dissimilar figures, Psychol. 46:53–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fox, R., and Check, R., 1966, Forced-choice recognition during binocular rivalry, Psychon. Sci. 6:471–472.Google Scholar
  33. Fox, R., and Check, R., 1968, Detection of motion during binocular rivalry suppression, J. Exp. Psychol. 78:388–395.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Frisby, J. P., and Clatworthy, J. L., 1974, Learning to see complex random-dot stereograms, Perception 4:173–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Frisby, J. P., and Mayhew, J. E. W., 1978a, Contrast sensitivity function for stereopsis, Perception 7:423–429.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Frisby, J. P., and Mayhew, J. E. W., 1978b, The relationship between apparent depth and disparity in rivalrous-texture stereograms, Perception 7:661–678.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Gibson, J. J., 1937, Adaptation with negative aftereffect, Psychol. Rev. 44:222–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Goldstein, A. G., 1970, Binocular fusion and contour suppression, Percept. Psychophys. 7:28–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Grindley, G. C., and Townsend, V., 1965, Binocular masking induced by a moving object, J. Exp. Psychol. 17:97–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hastorf, A. H., and Myro, G., 1959, The effect of meaning on binocular rivalry, Am. J. Psychol. 72:393–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Helmholtz, H. von, 1924, Treatise on Physiological Optics (trans, from 3rd German ed., 1909), The Optical Society of America, New York.Google Scholar
  42. Hering, E., 1920/1964, Outlines of a Theory of the Light Sense (L. Hurvich and D. Jameson, trans.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, p. 250.Google Scholar
  43. Hochberg, J., 1964, Contralateral suppressive fields of binocular combination, Psychon. Sci. 1:157–158.Google Scholar
  44. Hubel, D. H., and Livingstone, M. S., 1987, Segregation of form, color, and stereopsis in primate area 18, J. Neurosci. 7:3378–3415.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Hurvich, L. M., and Jameson, D., 1955, Some quantitative aspects of an opponent-colors theory: II. Brightness, saturation, and hue in normal and dichromatic vision, J. Ophthalmol. Soc. Am. 45:602–616.Google Scholar
  46. Jameson, D., and Hurvich, L. M., 1955, Some quantitative aspects of an opponent-colors theory: I. Chromatic responses and spectral saturation, J. Ophthalmol. Soc. Am. 45:546–552.Google Scholar
  47. Jampolsky, A., 1955, Characteristics of suppression in stabismus, AMA Arch. Ophthalmol. 54:683–696.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Jones, R. K., and Lee, D. N., 1981, Why two eyes are better than one: Two views of binocular vision, J. Exp. Psychol. 7:30–40.Google Scholar
  49. Julesz, B., 1971, Foundations of Cyclopean Perception, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  50. Julesz, B., and Miller, J. E., 1975, Independent spatial-frequencytuned channels in binocular fusion and rivalry, Perception 4:125–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Julesz, B., and Tyler, C. W., 1976, Neurontropy, an entropy-like measure of neural correlation in binocular fusion and rivalry, Biol. Cybernet. 23:25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kaplan, I. T, and Metlay, W., 1964, Light intensity and binocular rivalry, J. Exp. Psychol. 67:22–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Kaufman, L., 1963, On the spread of suppression and binocular rivalry, Vision Res. 3:401–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Kaufman, L., 1974, Sight and Mind, Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  55. Kaufman, L., and Arditi, A., 1976, The fusion illusion, Vision Res. 16:335–343.Google Scholar
  56. Kohler, W., and Wallach, H., 1944, Figurai aftereffects: An investigation of visual processes, Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. 88:4.Google Scholar
  57. Lehmkuhle, S. W., and Fox, R., 1975, Effect of binocular rivalry suppression on the motion aftereffect, Vision Res. 15:855–859.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Livingstone, M. S., and Hubel, D. H., 1987, Psychophysical evidence for separate channels for the perception of form, color, movement, and stereopsis, J. Neurosci. 7:3416–3468.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Livingstone, M., and Hubel, D., 1988, Segregation of form, color, movement, and depth: Anatomy, physiology, and perception, Science 240:740–749.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Makous, W., and Sanders, K. R., 1978, Suppressive interactions between fused contours, in: Visual Psychophysics and Physiology (J. C. Armington, J. Krauskopf, and B. R. Wooten, eds.), 167–179, Academic Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. McCollough, C., 1965, Color adaptation of edge-detectors in the human visual system, Science 149:1115–1116.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Mitchell, D. E., 1969, Qualitative depth localization with diplopic images of dissimilar shape, Vision Res. 9:991–994.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Moulden, B., 1980, Aftereffects and the integration of neural activity within a channel, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. [Biol.] 290:39–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Nakayama, K., and Shimojo, S., 1988, Depth, rivalry and subjective contours from unpaired monocular points, IOVS ARVO [Suppl.] 29:21.Google Scholar
  65. Ogle, K. N., 1952, On the limits of stereoscopic vision, J. Exp. Psychol. 44:253–259.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. O’Shea, R. P., 1987, Chronometrie analysis supports fusion rather than suppression theory of binocular vision, Vision Res. 27:781–791.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. O’Shea, R. P., and Blake, R., 1987, Depth without disparity in random-dot stereograms, Percept. Psychophys. 42:205–214.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. O’Shea, R. P., and Crassini, B., 1981, Interocular transfer of the motion aftereffect is not reduced by binocular rivalry, Vision Res. 21:801–804.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Over, R., Long, N., and Lovegrove, W., 1973, Absence of binocular interaction between spatial and color attributes of visual stimuli, Percept. Psychophys. 13(3):534–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Panum, P. L., 1957, Physiological Investigations Concerning Vision with 2 Eyes, Dartmouth Eye Institute, Hanover, NH.Google Scholar
  71. Poggio, G. F., and Fischer, B., 1977, Binocular interaction and depth sensitivity in the striate and prestriate cortex of behaving rhesus monkey, J. Neurophysiol. 40:1392–1405.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Poggio, G. F., and Talbot, W. H., 1981, Mechanisms of static and dynamic stereopsis in foveal cortex of the rhesus monkey, J. Physiol. (Lond.) 315:469–492.Google Scholar
  73. Ramachandran, V. S., and Sriram, S., 1972, Stereopsis generated with Julesz patterns in spite of rivalry imposed by colour filters, Nature 237:347–348.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Richards, W., 1970, Stereopsis and stereoblindness, Exp. Brain Res. 10:380–388.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Richards, W., 1971, Anomalous stereoscopic depth perception, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 61:410–414.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Rose, D., and Blake, R., 1988, Mislocalization of diplopic images, J. Opt. Soc. Am. [A] 5:1512–1521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Schor, C.M., 1977, Visual stimuli for strabismic suppression, Perception, 6:583–593.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Schor, C.M., 1987, Spatial factors limiting stereopsis and fusion, Optics News 13:14–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Schor, C. M., Wood, I., and Ogawa, J., 1984, Binocular sensory fusion is limited by spatial resolution, Vision Res. 24:661–665.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Schor, C.M., Landsman, L., and Erickson, P., 1987, Ocular dominance and the interocular suppression of blur in monovision, Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 64:723–730.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Shattuck, S., and Held, R., 1974, Color and edge sensitive channels converge on stereo-depth analyzers, Vision Res. 14:309–311.Google Scholar
  82. Sheedy, J. E., and Fry, G. A., 1979, The perceived direction of the binocular image, Vision Res. 19:201–211.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Shimojo, S., and Nakajima, Y., 1981, Adaptation to the reversal of binocular depth cues: Effects of wearing left-right reversing spectacles on stereoscopic depth perception, Perception 10:391–402.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Sloane, M. E., and Blake, R., 1987, Perceptually unequal spatial frequencies do not yield stereoscopic tilt, Percept. Psychophys. 42:569–575.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Smith, E. L., Levi, D. M., Harwerth, R. S., and White, J. M., 1982, Color vision is altered during the suppression phase of binocular rivalry, Science 218:802–804.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Treisman, A., 1962, Binocular rivalry and stereoscopic depth perception, Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 14:23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Tyler, C. W., 1975, Stereoscopic tilt and size aftereffects, Perception 4:187–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Tyler, C. W., 1983, Sensory processing of binocular disparity, in: Vergence Eye Movements (C W. Schor and K. J. Ciuffreda, eds.), 199–295, Butterworth, London.Google Scholar
  89. Tyler, C. W., 1984, Sensory processing of binocular disparity, in: Vergence Eye Movements (C. W. Schor and K. J. Ciuffreda, eds.), 199–295, Butterworth, London.Google Scholar
  90. Verhoeff, F. H., 1933, Effect on steropsis produced by disparate retinal images of different luminosities, Arch. Ophthalmol. 10:640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Verhoeff, F. H., 1935, A new theory of binocular vision, Arch Ophthalmol. 13:152–175.Google Scholar
  92. Verhoeff, F. H., 1959, Panum’s area and some other prevailing misconceptions concerning binocular vision, Trans. Am. Ophthalmol. Soc. 57:37–47.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. Wade, N. J., 1973, Binocular rivalry and binocular fusion of after-images, Vision Res. 13:999–1000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Wade, N. J., and Wenderoth, P., 1978, The influence of colour and contour rivalry on the magnitude of the tilt aftereffect, Vision Res. 18:827–835.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Wales, R., and Fox, R., 1970, Increment detection thresholds during binocular rivalry suppression, Percept. Psychophys. 8:90–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Walker, P., 1978, Binocular rivalry: Central or peripheral selective processes, Psych. Bull. 85:376–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Washburn, M. F., and Manning, P., 1934, Retinal rivalry in free vision of a solid object, Am. J. Psychol. 46:632–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Westheimer, G., and McKee, S. P., 1980, Stereoscopic acuity with defocused and spatially filtered retinal images, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 70:772–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Wheatstone, C., 1838, Some remarkable and hitherto unobserved phenomena of binocular vision, Phil. Trans. (Lond.) 128:31l-394.Google Scholar
  100. Wheatstone, C., 1852, Some remarkable and hitherto unobserved phenomena of binocular vision: Part Two, Phil. Mag. 4:504–523.Google Scholar
  101. White, K. D., Petry, H. M., Riggs, L. A., and Miller, J., 1978, Binocular interactions during establishment of McCollough effects, Vision Res. 18:1201–1215.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Wohlgemuth, A., 1911, On the aftereffect of seen movement, Br. J. Psychol. 1 (monograph supplement): 1–17.Google Scholar
  103. Wolfe, J. M., 1983a, Afterimages, binocular rivalry, and the false fusion phenomenon, Perception 12:439–445.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Wolfe, J. M., 1983b, Influence of spatial frequency, luminance, and duration on binocular rivalry and abnormal fusion of briefly present, dichoptic stimuli, Perception 12:447–456.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Wolfe, J. M., 1986a, Briefly presented stimuli can disrupt constant suppression and binocular rivalry suppression, Perception 15:413–417.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Wolfe, J. M., 1986b, Stereopsis and binocular rivalry, Psychol. Rev. 93:269–282.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Wolfe, J. M., and Blake, R., 1985, Dissecting the binocular visual system with psychophysical tools, in: Models of Visual Cortex (D. Rose and V.G. Dobson, eds.), 192–199, John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  108. Wolfe, J. M., and Held, R., 1981, A purely binocular mechanism in human vision, Vision Res. 21:1755–1759.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Wolfe, J. M., and Held, R., 1982, Binocular adaptation that cannot be measured monocularly, Perception 11:287–295.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Wolfe, J. M., and Held, R., 1983, Shared characteristics of stereopsis and the purely binocular process, Vision Res. 23:217–227.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeremy M. Wolfe
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Brain and Cognitive SciencesMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations