Cargando…
Binocular Summation Revisited: Beyond √2
Our ability to detect faint images is better with two eyes than with one, but how great is this improvement? A meta-analysis of 65 studies published across more than 5 decades shows definitively that psychophysical binocular summation (the ratio of binocular to monocular contrast sensitivity) is sig...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Psychological Association
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6195301/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30102058 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bul0000163 |
_version_ | 1783364373751791616 |
---|---|
author | Baker, Daniel H. Lygo, Freya A. Meese, Tim S. Georgeson, Mark A. |
author_facet | Baker, Daniel H. Lygo, Freya A. Meese, Tim S. Georgeson, Mark A. |
author_sort | Baker, Daniel H. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Our ability to detect faint images is better with two eyes than with one, but how great is this improvement? A meta-analysis of 65 studies published across more than 5 decades shows definitively that psychophysical binocular summation (the ratio of binocular to monocular contrast sensitivity) is significantly greater than the canonical value of √2. Several methodological factors were also found to affect summation estimates. Binocular summation was significantly affected by both the spatial and temporal frequency of the stimulus, and stimulus speed (the ratio of temporal to spatial frequency) systematically predicts summation levels, with slow speeds (high spatial and low temporal frequencies) producing the strongest summation. We furthermore show that empirical summation estimates are affected by the ratio of monocular sensitivities, which varies across individuals, and is abnormal in visual disorders such as amblyopia. A simple modeling framework is presented to interpret the results of summation experiments. In combination with the empirical results, this model suggests that there is no single value for binocular summation, but instead that summation ratios depend on methodological factors that influence the strength of a nonlinearity occurring early in the visual pathway, before binocular combination of signals. Best practice methodological guidelines are proposed for obtaining accurate estimates of neural summation in future studies, including those involving patient groups with impaired binocular vision. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6195301 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | American Psychological Association |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61953012018-10-22 Binocular Summation Revisited: Beyond √2 Baker, Daniel H. Lygo, Freya A. Meese, Tim S. Georgeson, Mark A. Psychol Bull Article Our ability to detect faint images is better with two eyes than with one, but how great is this improvement? A meta-analysis of 65 studies published across more than 5 decades shows definitively that psychophysical binocular summation (the ratio of binocular to monocular contrast sensitivity) is significantly greater than the canonical value of √2. Several methodological factors were also found to affect summation estimates. Binocular summation was significantly affected by both the spatial and temporal frequency of the stimulus, and stimulus speed (the ratio of temporal to spatial frequency) systematically predicts summation levels, with slow speeds (high spatial and low temporal frequencies) producing the strongest summation. We furthermore show that empirical summation estimates are affected by the ratio of monocular sensitivities, which varies across individuals, and is abnormal in visual disorders such as amblyopia. A simple modeling framework is presented to interpret the results of summation experiments. In combination with the empirical results, this model suggests that there is no single value for binocular summation, but instead that summation ratios depend on methodological factors that influence the strength of a nonlinearity occurring early in the visual pathway, before binocular combination of signals. Best practice methodological guidelines are proposed for obtaining accurate estimates of neural summation in future studies, including those involving patient groups with impaired binocular vision. American Psychological Association 2018-08-13 2018-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6195301/ /pubmed/30102058 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bul0000163 Text en © 2018 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This article has been published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s). Author(s) grant(s) the American Psychological Association the exclusive right to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher. |
spellingShingle | Article Baker, Daniel H. Lygo, Freya A. Meese, Tim S. Georgeson, Mark A. Binocular Summation Revisited: Beyond √2 |
title | Binocular Summation Revisited: Beyond √2 |
title_full | Binocular Summation Revisited: Beyond √2 |
title_fullStr | Binocular Summation Revisited: Beyond √2 |
title_full_unstemmed | Binocular Summation Revisited: Beyond √2 |
title_short | Binocular Summation Revisited: Beyond √2 |
title_sort | binocular summation revisited: beyond √2 |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6195301/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30102058 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bul0000163 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bakerdanielh binocularsummationrevisitedbeyond2 AT lygofreyaa binocularsummationrevisitedbeyond2 AT meesetims binocularsummationrevisitedbeyond2 AT georgesonmarka binocularsummationrevisitedbeyond2 |