December 2022
Volume 22, Issue 14
Open Access
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   December 2022
Peripheral binocular/monocular rivalry in vision multiplexing devices for mobility
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Jae-Hyun Jung
    Schepens Eye Research Institute/Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School
  • Eli Peli
    Schepens Eye Research Institute/Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School
  • Sandhya Shekar
    Schepens Eye Research Institute/Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School
  • Shui'er Han
    Schepens Eye Research Institute/Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School
  • Footnotes
    Acknowledgements  Supported by NIH R01 EY031777
Journal of Vision December 2022, Vol.22, 3565. doi:https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.22.14.3565
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Jae-Hyun Jung, Eli Peli, Sandhya Shekar, Shui'er Han; Peripheral binocular/monocular rivalry in vision multiplexing devices for mobility. Journal of Vision 2022;22(14):3565. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.22.14.3565.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Binocular (unilateral fitting of a monocular device) or monocular (see-through display) vision multiplexing (Peli, 2000) has been widely used to provide additional spatial information without losing the normal field. These multiplexing devices, peripheral prisms (Peli and Jung, 2017) or smart glasses such as Google glass, are mounted in the periphery to avoid bothering the central field. While most of the binocular field of a user sees the visual self-motion during mobility, only a part of the peripheral field sees binocularly/monocularly multiplexed information, which may be suppressed due to rivalry (Shen et al. 2015). Since multiplexing configurations (monocular opaque, monocular see-through, and stereoscopic see-through devices) may cause different types of rivalries, we compared the predominance and alteration rate to determine the detection relative efficacy. Normal subjects (N=9) viewed a visual self-motion video of a full-field corridor in Oculus Quest 2 while fixating a central target. Opaque monocular, half-transparent monocular, or half-transparent binocular periphery target was randomly displayed as three multiplexing conditions at 5,10 or 15° over the self-motion video. The subject would hold a button whenever a 10°×10° periphery target (1 cycle/° vertical grating drifting horizontally at 5°/sec) was visible. A 3x3 repeated-measures ANOVA revealed significant main effects of viewing conditions on predominance and alteration rate (ps<0.01). Predominance was highest and the alteration rate was lowest in order through the stereoscopic see-through, monocular opaque, and monocular see-through devices. The main effect of eccentricity was only trended significantly for predominance (p<0.1) but not for the alteration rate. Predominance was highest in the order of 5, 10, and 15°. The results suggest that the peripheral multiplexed information is least suppressed in the stereoscopic see-through display, which may be more effective than other configurations. The multiplexed information in more central eccentricity is less suppressed but may more bother the central self-motion as a trade-off.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×