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.
BerendsE. M. (2001) Depth perception and adaptation to disparity. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Utrecht University, The Netherlands.
5.
BerendsE. M.ErkelensC. J. (2001) Adaptation to disparity but not to perceived depth. Vision Research41(7): 883–892.
6.
Berends E. M., Erkelens C. J., & Van Ee, R. (2000). Adaptation to oscillating disparity. Perception, 29 (ECVP Abstract Supplement).
7.
BerendsE. M.LiuB.SchorC. M. (2005) Stereo-slant adaptation is high level and does not involve disparity coding. Journal of Vision5(1): 71–80.
8.
BergmanR.GibsonJ. J. (1959) The negative after-effect of the perception of a surface slanted in the third dimension. The American Journal of Psychology72(3): 364–374.
9.
BlakemoreC. B.JuleszB. (1971) Stereoscopic depth aftereffect produced without monocular cues. Science171: 286–288.
10.
BrainardD. H. (1997) The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision10(4): 433–436.
11.
ChampionR. A.SimmonsD. R.MamassianP. (2004) The influence of object size and surface shape on shape constancy from stereo. Perception33(2): 237–247.
12.
CurranW. S.JohnstonA. W. (1996) Three-dimensional curvature contrast—Geometric or brightness illusion?Vision Research36(22): 3641–3653.
13.
DominiF.AdamsW. J.BanksM. S. (2001) 3D after-effects are due to shape and not disparity adaptation. Vision Research41(21): 2733–2739.
14.
DukeP. A.WilcoxL. M. (2003) Adaptation to vertical disparity induced-depth: Implications for disparity processing. Vision Research43: 135–147.
15.
EpsteinW. (1972) Adaptation to uniocular image magnification: Is the underlying shift proprioceptive?Perception & Psychophysics11: 89–91.
16.
EpsteinW.MorganC. L. (1970) Adaptation to uniocular image magnification: Modification of the disparity-depth relationship. The American Journal of Psychology83(3): 322–329.
17.
GibsonJ. J. (1933) Adaptation, after-effect and contrast in the perception of curved lines. Journal of Experimental Psychology16(1): 1–31.
18.
HowardI. P.RogersB. J. (2012) Perceiving in depthVol. 2, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
19.
JanssenP.VogelsR.OrbanG. A. (2000) Three-dimensional shape coding in inferior temporal cortex. Neuron27(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.
KnapenT. H. J.Van EeR. (2006) Slant perception, and its voluntary control, do not govern the slant aftereffect: Multiple slant signals adapt independently. Vision Research46(20): 3381–3392.
22.
KoenderinkJ. J. (1990) Solid shape, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23.
KöhlerW.EmeryD. A. (1947) Figural after-effects in the third dimension of visual space. The American Journal of Psychology60(2): 159–201.
24.
LeopardiP. C. (2006) A partition of the unit sphere into regions of equal area and small diameter. Electronic Transactions on Numerical Analysis25: 309–327.
MackA.ChitayatD. (1970) Eye-dependent and disparity adaptation to opposite visual-field rotations. The American Journal of Psychology83(3): 352–371.
27.
MitchellD. E.BakerA. G. (1973) Stereoscopic aftereffects: Evidence for disparity-specific neurones in the human visual system. Vision Research13(12): 2273–2288.
28.
NoestA. J.Van EeR.Van Den BergA. V. (2006) Direct extraction of curvature-based metric shape from stereo by view-modulated receptive fields. Biological Cybernetics95(5): 455–486.
29.
Orban, G. A., Janssen, P., & Vogels, R. (2006). Extracting 3d structure from disparity. Trends in Neurosciences, 29, 466–473.
30.
PelliD. G. (1997) The Video Toolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision10(4): 437–442.
31.
PoomL.BörjessonE. (1999) Perceptual depth synthesis in the visual system as revealed by selective adaptation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance25(2): 504–517.
32.
PrestonT. J.KourtziZ.WelchmanA. E. (2009) Adaptive estimation of three-dimensional structure in the human brain. Journal of Neuroscience29(6): 1688–1698.
33.
RogersB. J.CagenelloR. (1989) Disparity curvature and the perception of three-dimensional surfaces. Nature339(6220): 135–137.
34.
RogersB.GrahamM. (1985) Motion parallax and the perception of three-dimensional surfaces. Brain Mechanisms and Spatial Vision21: 95–111.
35.
RohalyA. M.WilsonH. R. (1994) Disparity averaging across spatial scales. Vision Research34(10): 1315–1325.
36.
RyanC. L.GillamB. J. (1993) A proximity-contingent stereoscopic depth aftereffect: Evidence for adaptation to disparity gradients. Perception22: 403–418.
37.
SekulerR. W.PantleA. J. (1967) A model for after-effects of seen movement. Vision Research7(5–6): 427–439.
38.
SmallmanH. S.MacLeodD. I. A. (1997) Spatial scale interactions in stereo sensitivity and the neural representation of binocular disparity. Perception26(8): 977–994.
39.
TayaS.SatoM.NakamizoS. (2005) Stereoscopic depth aftereffects without retinal position correspondence between adaptation and test stimuli. Vision Research45(14): 1857–1866.
40.
Te PasS. F.KappersA. M. L. (2001) First-order structure induces the 3-D curvature contrast effect. Vision Research41(28): 3829–3835.
41.
Te PasS. F.RogersB. J.LedgewayT. (2000) Curvature contrast in stereoscopically defined surfaces. Current Psychology Letters: Brain, Behavior and Cognition1(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 KooijK.DominiF.Te PasS. F. (2011) Surface boundaries do not constrain a depth aftereffect. Vision Research51(1): 138–146.
44.
Van Der KooijK.Te PasS. F. (2009a) Perception of 3D shape in context: Contrast and assimilation. Vision Research49(7): 746–751.
45.
Van Der KooijK.Te PasS. F. (2009b) Uncertainty reveals surround modulation of shape. Journal of Vision9(3): 1–8.
46.
Van Der KooijK.Te PasS. F. (2010) Shape contrast: A global mechanism?Vision Research50(23): 2455–2459.
47.
VrevenD. L. (2006) 3D shape discrimination using relative disparity derivatives. Vision Research46(25): 4181–4192.
