Stereo-Curvature Aftereffect Is Due to More Than Shape Curvature Adaptation

Abstract

For stereo-curvature aftereffect (sCAE), there is no agreement on whether adaptation occurs at the disparity-specified stage, the percept-specified stage, or both. Additionally, it remains uncertain whether retinal-position-dependent sCAE can be induced by possible adaptation to disparity-specified sources. Our study aimed to investigate the dependency and processing levels of adaptation underlying sCAE using dynamic spherical adaptation stimuli with static fixation. Experiment 1 examined the dependency by dynamically altering the location or size of adaptation stimuli. Experiment 2 investigated the adaptation levels via three sub-experiments: Experiment 2.1 examined how eccentricity influenced adaptation strength using static adaptation stimuli with different eccentricities, Experiment 2.2 tested a hypothesis about adaptation to a percept-specified primitive shape index (PSI) using dynamic size change of adaptation stimuli, and Experiment 2.3 tested another hypothesis on adapting disparity-specified average disparity information (ADI) using dynamic PSI change of adaptation stimuli. The results showed retinal-position-dependent and scale-independent sCAE. In addition to a possible eccentricity effect, the retinal-position dependence can result from ADI adaptation while the scale independence can be attributed to PSI adaptation. Therefore, sCAE is caused by adaptation at both the disparity-specified and percept-specified stages. Additionally, sCAE endows two coexisting adaptation processes with one dependent on retinal position and one independent of retinal position.

Keywords

stereopsis binocular disparity stereo-curvature aftereffect multi-level adaptation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adams

W. J.

Banks

M. S.

Van Ee

(2001) Adaptation to three-dimensional distortions in human vision. Nature Neuroscience 4(11): 1063–1064.

Anderson

B. L.

(1992) Hysteresis, cooperativity, and depth averaging in dynamic random-dot stereograms. Perception & Psychophysics 51(6): 511–528.

Balch

Milewski

A. E.

Yonas

(1977) Mechanisms underlying the slant aftereffect. Perception & Psychophysics 21(6): 581–585.

Berends

E. M.

(2001) Depth perception and adaptation to disparity. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Utrecht University, The Netherlands.

Berends

E. M.

Erkelens

C. J.

(2001) Adaptation to disparity but not to perceived depth. Vision Research 41(7): 883–892.

Berends E. M., Erkelens C. J., & Van Ee, R. (2000). Adaptation to oscillating disparity. Perception, 29 (ECVP Abstract Supplement).

Berends

E. M.

Liu

Schor

C. M.

(2005) Stereo-slant adaptation is high level and does not involve disparity coding. Journal of Vision 5(1): 71–80.

Bergman

Gibson

J. J.

(1959) The negative after-effect of the perception of a surface slanted in the third dimension. The American Journal of Psychology 72(3): 364–374.

Blakemore

C. B.

Julesz

(1971) Stereoscopic depth aftereffect produced without monocular cues. Science 171: 286–288.

10.

Brainard

D. H.

(1997) The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision 10(4): 433–436.

11.

Champion

R. A.

Simmons

D. R.

Mamassian

(2004) The influence of object size and surface shape on shape constancy from stereo. Perception 33(2): 237–247.

12.

Curran

W. S.

Johnston

A. W.

(1996) Three-dimensional curvature contrast—Geometric or brightness illusion? Vision Research 36(22): 3641–3653.

13.

Domini

Adams

W. J.

Banks

M. S.

(2001) 3D after-effects are due to shape and not disparity adaptation. Vision Research 41(21): 2733–2739.

14.

Duke

P. A.

Wilcox

L. M.

(2003) Adaptation to vertical disparity induced-depth: Implications for disparity processing. Vision Research 43: 135–147.

15.

Epstein

(1972) Adaptation to uniocular image magnification: Is the underlying shift proprioceptive? Perception & Psychophysics 11: 89–91.

16.

Epstein

Morgan

C. L.

(1970) Adaptation to uniocular image magnification: Modification of the disparity-depth relationship. The American Journal of Psychology 83(3): 322–329.

17.

Gibson

J. J.

(1933) Adaptation, after-effect and contrast in the perception of curved lines. Journal of Experimental Psychology 16(1): 1–31.

18.

Howard

I. P.

Rogers

B. J.

(2012) Perceiving in depth Vol. 2, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

19.

Janssen

Vogels

Orban

G. A.

(2000) Three-dimensional shape coding in inferior temporal cortex. Neuron 27(2): 385–397.

20.

Kleiner M., Brainard, D. H., & Pelli, D. G. (2007). What's new in Psychtoolbox-3? Perception, 36 (ECVP Abstract Supplement).

21.

Knapen

T. H. J.

Van Ee

(2006) Slant perception, and its voluntary control, do not govern the slant aftereffect: Multiple slant signals adapt independently. Vision Research 46(20): 3381–3392.

22.

Koenderink

J. J.

(1990) Solid shape, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

23.

Köhler

Emery

D. A.

(1947) Figural after-effects in the third dimension of visual space. The American Journal of Psychology 60(2): 159–201.

24.

Leopardi

P. C.

(2006) A partition of the unit sphere into regions of equal area and small diameter. Electronic Transactions on Numerical Analysis 25: 309–327.

25.

Long

Over

(1973) Stereoscopic depth aftereffects with random-dot patterns. Vision Research 13(7): 1283–1287.

26.

Mack

Chitayat

(1970) Eye-dependent and disparity adaptation to opposite visual-field rotations. The American Journal of Psychology 83(3): 352–371.

27.

Mitchell

D. E.

Baker

A. G.

(1973) Stereoscopic aftereffects: Evidence for disparity-specific neurones in the human visual system. Vision Research 13(12): 2273–2288.

28.

Noest

A. J.

Van Ee

Van Den Berg

A. V.

(2006) Direct extraction of curvature-based metric shape from stereo by view-modulated receptive fields. Biological Cybernetics 95(5): 455–486.

29.

Orban, G. A., Janssen, P., & Vogels, R. (2006). Extracting 3d structure from disparity. Trends in Neurosciences, 29, 466–473.

30.

Pelli

D. G.

(1997) The Video Toolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision 10(4): 437–442.

31.

Poom

Börjesson

(1999) Perceptual depth synthesis in the visual system as revealed by selective adaptation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 25(2): 504–517.

32.

Preston

T. J.

Kourtzi

Welchman

A. E.

(2009) Adaptive estimation of three-dimensional structure in the human brain. Journal of Neuroscience 29(6): 1688–1698.

33.

Rogers

B. J.

Cagenello

(1989) Disparity curvature and the perception of three-dimensional surfaces. Nature 339(6220): 135–137.

34.

Rogers

Graham

(1985) Motion parallax and the perception of three-dimensional surfaces. Brain Mechanisms and Spatial Vision 21: 95–111.

35.

Rohaly

A. M.

Wilson

H. R.

(1994) Disparity averaging across spatial scales. Vision Research 34(10): 1315–1325.

36.

Ryan

C. L.

Gillam

B. J.

(1993) A proximity-contingent stereoscopic depth aftereffect: Evidence for adaptation to disparity gradients. Perception 22: 403–418.

37.

Sekuler

R. W.

Pantle

A. J.

(1967) A model for after-effects of seen movement. Vision Research 7(5–6): 427–439.

38.

Smallman

H. S.

MacLeod

D. I. A.

(1997) Spatial scale interactions in stereo sensitivity and the neural representation of binocular disparity. Perception 26(8): 977–994.

39.

Taya

Sato

Nakamizo

(2005) Stereoscopic depth aftereffects without retinal position correspondence between adaptation and test stimuli. Vision Research 45(14): 1857–1866.

40.

Te Pas

S. F.

Kappers

A. M. L.

(2001) First-order structure induces the 3-D curvature contrast effect. Vision Research 41(28): 3829–3835.

41.

Te Pas

S. F.

Rogers

B. J.

Ledgeway

(2000) Curvature contrast in stereoscopically defined surfaces. Current Psychology Letters: Brain, Behavior and Cognition 1(1): 117–126.

42.

Tjan, B. S., Lestou, V., & Kourtzi, Z. (2006). Uncertainty and invariance in the human visual cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology, 96, 1556–1568.

43.

Van Der Kooij

Domini

Te Pas

S. F.

(2011) Surface boundaries do not constrain a depth aftereffect. Vision Research 51(1): 138–146.

44.

Van Der Kooij

Te Pas

S. F.

(2009a) Perception of 3D shape in context: Contrast and assimilation. Vision Research 49(7): 746–751.

45.

Van Der Kooij

Te Pas

S. F.

(2009b) Uncertainty reveals surround modulation of shape. Journal of Vision 9(3): 1–8.

46.

Van Der Kooij

Te Pas

S. F.

(2010) Shape contrast: A global mechanism? Vision Research 50(23): 2455–2459.

47.

Vreven

D. L.

(2006) 3D shape discrimination using relative disparity derivatives. Vision Research 46(25): 4181–4192.