The Role of Binocular Disparity Vergence Eye Movements in Disambiguating Superimposed Retinal Images

  • Kenneth J. Ciuffreda
  • Mark Rosenfield
  • Lawrence Stark
Chapter
Part of the Perspectives in Vision Research book series (PIVR)

Abstract

In laboratory investigations of the disparity or fu-sional vergence mechanism, it is common to present the observer with isolated objects of regard having differing degrees of retinal disparity and to measure the resulting vergence motor response. However, under more naturalistic conditions, the retinal image may be composed from a complex, multilayered object space involving both overlapping and non-overlapping, spatially discrete object planes producing varying degrees of retinal disparity and defocus. Furthermore, these images frequently occupy an extended area of the retina well beyond the central foveal and macular regions. The task of disambiguating or separating these images in an optimal manner, with the requirement for accurate bifoveal fixation, is likely to represent a complex procedure involving multiple sensory and motor inputs.

Keywords

Retinal Image Extended Object Apparent Distance Monocular Viewing Retinal Disparity 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ciuffreda, K. J., and Kenyon, R. V., 1983, Accommodative vergence and accommodation in normals, amblyopes, and strabismics, in: Vergence Eye Movements: Basic and Clinical Aspects (C.M. Schor and K. J. Ciuffreda, eds.), Butterworths, Boston, pp. 101–173.Google Scholar
  2. Fisher, S. K., and Ciuffreda, K. J., 1988, Accommodation and apparent distance, Perception 17:609–621.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Fisher, S. K., Ciuffreda, K. J., Tannen, B., and Super, P., 1988, Stability of tonic vergence, Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 29:1577–1581.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Gogel, W. C., 1961, Convergence as a cue to absolute distance, J. Psychol. 52:287–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hokoda, S. C., and Ciuffreda, K. J., 1983, Theoretical and clinical importance of proximal vergence and accommodation, in: Vergence Eye Movements: Basic and Clinical Aspects (C.M. Schor and K. J. Ciuffreda, eds.), Butterworths, Boston, pp. 75–97.Google Scholar
  6. Hung, G. K., and Semmlow, J. L., 1980, Static behavior of accommodation and vergence: Computer simulation of an interactive dual-feedback system, IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 27:439–447.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ittleson, W. H., 1960, Visual Space Perception, Springer, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Jones, R., 1983, Horizontal disparity vergence, in: Vergence Eye Movements: Basic and Clinical Aspects (C.M. Schor and K. J. Ciuffreda, eds.), Butterworths, Boston, pp. 297–316.Google Scholar
  9. Lie, I., 1965, Convergence as a cue to perceived size and distance, Scand. J. Psychol. 6:109–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Maddox, E. E., 1893, The Clinical Use of Prisms and the Decenter-ing of Lenses (2nd ed.), John Wright and Sons, Bristol, p. 106.Google Scholar
  11. Morgan, M. W., 1983, The Maddox analysis of vergence, in: Vergence Eye Movements: Basic and Clinical Aspects (C.M. Schor and K. J. Ciuffreda, eds.), Butterworths, Boston, pp. 15–21.Google Scholar
  12. Owens, D. A., and Leibowitz, H. W., 1983, Perceptual and motor consequences of tonic vergence, in: Vergence Eye Movements: Basic and Clinical Aspects (C.M. Schor and K. J. Ciuffreda, eds.), Butterworths, Boston, pp. 25–74.Google Scholar
  13. Rosenfield, M., Ciuffreda, K. J., and Hung, G. K., 1991, The linearity of proximally-induced accommodation and vergence, Invest. Ophthal. Vis. Sci. (Suppl.), 32:1125.Google Scholar
  14. Tyler, C. W., 1983, Sensory processing of binocular disparity, in: Vergence Eye Movements: Basic and Clinical Aspects (C.M. Schor and K. J. Ciuffreda, eds.), Butterworths, Boston, pp. 199–295.Google Scholar
  15. von Hofsten, C., 1976, The role of convergence in visual space perception, Vision Res. 16:193–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Walker, P., and Churms, P., 1987, The diffractive bifocal contact lens, Optician 194(2 Oct.):21–24.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kenneth J. Ciuffreda
    • 1
  • Mark Rosenfield
    • 1
  • Lawrence Stark
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Vision Sciences, State College of OptometryState University of New YorkNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.School of OptometryUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations