December 2022
Volume 22, Issue 14
Open Access
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   December 2022
Human stereovision is affected by adaptation in the monocular channels
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Cherlyn Ng
    University of Houston, Texas
  • Martin Banks
    University of California (Berkeley), California
  • Randolph Blake
    Vanderbilt University, Tennessee
  • Duje Tadin
    University of Rochester, New York
  • Geunyoung Yoon
    University of Houston, Texas
  • Footnotes
    Acknowledgements  This work was supported by NIH grants EY014999 and P30 EY001319, and funding from Research to Prevent Blindness (RPB).
Journal of Vision December 2022, Vol.22, 3751. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Cherlyn Ng, Martin Banks, Randolph Blake, Duje Tadin, Geunyoung Yoon; Human stereovision is affected by adaptation in the monocular channels. Journal of Vision 2022;22(14):3751.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Retinal images are the primary source of information for visual perception but subject to blur from the eyes’ imperfect optics. Improving the eyes’ optics should reduce blur and improve vision, but that was not always the case with stereovision. When tested with three-dimensional waves using adaptive optics, human participants with naturally good optics performed worse instead. The mean stereoacuity was 18.61arcsec through their own eyes but 33.34arcsec with the improved optics when tested with 1cpd waves. Likewise, stereoacuity was 28.22 and 53.82arcsec respectively, for 2cpd and 46.30 vs 85.50arcsec for 3cpd waves. This suggested that the visual system adapts to one’s own blur patterns to maximize stereovision. Evidence also came from replacing the participants’ own optics with someone else’s so that everyone now had the same blur patterns. Stereoacuity was also poorer in everyone compared to the person from whom the optics came (1cpd: 53.64arcsec [mean replacement] vs 8.46arcsec; 2cpd: 101.5 vs 12.91 arcsec; 3cpd: 182.34 vs 16.76arcsec). Did adaptation occur in monocular or binocular channels? We swapped the optics of the two eyes in comparison to eyes that received their own native blur. Swapping caused unfamiliarity in the monocular channels, but not in the binocular channels that still received the same combined blur and interocular difference. Stereoacuity was worse with the swap, indicating that adaptation had occurred in monocular channels (1cpd: 28.4arcsec with the native optics vs 43.4arcsec swapped; 2cpd: 53.6 vs 123.0arcsec; 3cpd: 144.5 vs 221.9arcsec). The detriment grew with interocular difference (1cpd: r=0.91, p=0.01; 2cpd: r=0.97, p=<0.01; 3cpd: r=0.91, p<0.01) as expected because swapping would matter only if the blur patterns in the two eyes were different. These results indicate a component of adaptation that happens before binocular combination towards the blur patterns of individual eyes.


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.