30 subjects performed an interception task in which the accuracy demands were varied under binocular vs monocular viewing conditions and under different conditions of environmental structure. The pattern of results suggests that the advantage of binocular viewing is due to the concordance of information detected by both eyes rather than to binocular vision per se. The presence of static environmental structure enhances performance because it provides a stable external basis against which optical changes can be evaluated.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BlakeR.FoxR. (1976) The psychophysical inquiry into binocular summation. Perception & Psychophysics, 14, 161–185.
2.
BootsmaR. J.PeperC. E. (1992) Predictive visual information sources for the regulation of action with special emphasis on catching and hitting. In ProteauL.ElliottD. (Eds.), Vision and motor conrol. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Pp. 285–314.
3.
BradleyD. C.QianN.AndersonR. A. (1995) Integration of motion and steropsis in the middle temporal cortical area of macaques. Nature, 373, 609–611.
4.
BradshawM. F.RogersB. J. (1996) The interaction of binocular disparity and motion parallax in the computation of depth. Vision Research, 36, 3457–3468.
5.
JonesR. K.LeeD. N. (1981) Why two eyes are better than one: The two views of binocular vision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 30–40.
6.
LaurentM.MontagneG.DureyA. (1996) Binocular invariants in interceptive tasks: A directed perception approach. Perception, 25, 1437–1450.
7.
McLeodP.McLaughlinC.Nimmo-SmithI. (1985) Information encapsulation and automaticity: Evidence from the visual control of finely timed actions. In PosnerM.MarinO. (Eds.), Attention and performance. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Pp. 391–405.
8.
MontagneG.LaurentM. (1994) The effects of environmental changes on one-handed catching. Journal of Motor Behavior, 26, 237–246.
9.
MontagneG.LaurentM.RipollH. (1993) Visual information pick-up in ball-catching. Human Movement Science, 12, 273–297.
10.
NawrotM.BlakeR. (1991) The interplay of stereopsis and structure from motion. Perception & Psychophysics, 49, 230–244.
11.
PeperC. E.BootsmaR. J.MestreD. R.BakkerE. C. (1994) Catching balls: How to get the hand to the right place at the right time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 591–612.
12.
RogersB. J.GrahamM. E. (1982) Similarities between motion parallax and stereopsis in human depth perception. Vision Research, 22, 261–270.
13.
RosengrenK. S.PickH. L.Von HofstenC. (1988) Role of visual information in ball catching. Journal of Motor Behavior, 20, 150–164.
14.
SavelsberghG. J. P.WhitingH. T. A. (1988) The effect of skill level, external frame of reference and environmental changes on one handed catching. Ergonomics, 31, 1655–1663.
15.
SavelsberghG. J. P.WhitingH. T. A. (1992) The acquisition of catching under monocular and binocular conditions. Journal of Motor Behavior, 24, 320–328.
16.
Von HofstenC.RosengrenK. S.PickH. L.NeelyG. (1992) The role of binocular information in ball catching. Journal of Motor Behavior, 24, 329–338.
17.
WeinerB. J.BrownD. R.MichelsK. M. (1991) Statistical principles in experimental design. (3rd ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill.
18.
WhitingH. T. A.SavelsberghG. J. P.FaberC. M. (1988) ‘Catch’ questions and incomplete answers. In ColleyA. M.BeechJ. R. (Eds.), Cognition and action in skilled behaviour. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Pp. 257–271.
