The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Binocular interaction: contrast matching and contrast discrimination are predicted by the same model

Binocular interaction: contrast matching and contrast discrimination are predicted by the same model
Binocular interaction: contrast matching and contrast discrimination are predicted by the same model
How do signals from the 2 eyes combine and interact? Our recent work has challenged earlier schemes in which monocular contrast signals are subject to square-law transduction followed by summation across eyes and binocular gain control. Much more successful was a new ‘two-stage’ model in which the initial transducer was almost linear and contrast gain control occurred both pre- and post binocular summation. Here we extend that work by: (i) exploring the two-dimensional stimulus space (defined by left- and right-eye contrasts) more thoroughly, and (ii) performing contrast discrimination and contrast matching tasks for the same stimuli. Twenty-five base-stimuli made from 1 c/deg patches of horizontal grating, were defined by the factorial combination of 5 contrasts for the left eye (0.3-32%) with five contrasts for the right eye (0.3-32%). Other than in contrast, the gratings in the two eyes were identical. In a 2IFC discrimination task, the base-stimuli were masks (pedestals), where the contrast increment was presented to one eye only. In a matching task, the base-stimuli were standards to which observers matched the contrast of either a monocular or binocular test grating. In the model, discrimination depends on the local gradient of the observer’s internal contrast-response function, while matching equates the magnitude (rather than gradient) of response to the test and standard. With all model parameters fixed by previous work, the two-stage model successfully predicted both the discrimination and the matching data and was much more successful than linear or quadratic binocular summation models. These results show that performance measures and perception (contrast discrimination and contrast matching) can be understood in the same theoretical framework for binocular contrast vision.
human vision, interocular suppression, masking, binocular vision, contrast gain control
0169-1015
397-413
Baker, D.H.
c581e755-4d12-40fa-9fca-5d4a29756141
Meese, T.S.
bbd04225-e94f-405a-8e42-112f38a5c1e1
Georgeson, M.A.
0974cc87-617c-4cc6-adb8-d4e441584de4
Baker, D.H.
c581e755-4d12-40fa-9fca-5d4a29756141
Meese, T.S.
bbd04225-e94f-405a-8e42-112f38a5c1e1
Georgeson, M.A.
0974cc87-617c-4cc6-adb8-d4e441584de4

Baker, D.H., Meese, T.S. and Georgeson, M.A. (2007) Binocular interaction: contrast matching and contrast discrimination are predicted by the same model. Spatial Vision, 20 (5), 397-413. (doi:10.1163/156856807781503622).

Record type: Article

Abstract

How do signals from the 2 eyes combine and interact? Our recent work has challenged earlier schemes in which monocular contrast signals are subject to square-law transduction followed by summation across eyes and binocular gain control. Much more successful was a new ‘two-stage’ model in which the initial transducer was almost linear and contrast gain control occurred both pre- and post binocular summation. Here we extend that work by: (i) exploring the two-dimensional stimulus space (defined by left- and right-eye contrasts) more thoroughly, and (ii) performing contrast discrimination and contrast matching tasks for the same stimuli. Twenty-five base-stimuli made from 1 c/deg patches of horizontal grating, were defined by the factorial combination of 5 contrasts for the left eye (0.3-32%) with five contrasts for the right eye (0.3-32%). Other than in contrast, the gratings in the two eyes were identical. In a 2IFC discrimination task, the base-stimuli were masks (pedestals), where the contrast increment was presented to one eye only. In a matching task, the base-stimuli were standards to which observers matched the contrast of either a monocular or binocular test grating. In the model, discrimination depends on the local gradient of the observer’s internal contrast-response function, while matching equates the magnitude (rather than gradient) of response to the test and standard. With all model parameters fixed by previous work, the two-stage model successfully predicted both the discrimination and the matching data and was much more successful than linear or quadratic binocular summation models. These results show that performance measures and perception (contrast discrimination and contrast matching) can be understood in the same theoretical framework for binocular contrast vision.

Text
Baker,_Meese_&_Georgeson_2007.pdf - Accepted Manuscript
Download (1MB)

More information

Submitted date: 30 June 2006
Published date: 1 September 2007
Keywords: human vision, interocular suppression, masking, binocular vision, contrast gain control

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 47920
URI: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/47920
ISSN: 0169-1015
PURE UUID: 5158bd29-4900-474b-8702-ed1c948efe92

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 09 Aug 2007
Last modified: 19 Jul 2019 18:49

Export record

Altmetrics

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×