Binocular contrast vision at and above threshold

A fundamental problem for any visual system with binocular overlap is the combination of information from the two eyes. Electrophysiology shows that binocular integration of luminance contrast occurs early in visual cortex, but a specific systems architecture has not been established for human vision. Here, we address this by performing binocular summation and monocular, binocular, and dichoptic masking experiments for horizontal 1 cycle per degree test and masking gratings. These data reject three previously published proposals, each of which predict too little binocular summation and insufficient dichoptic facilitation. However, a simple development of one of the rejected models (the twin summation model) and a completely new model (the two-stage model) provide very good fits to the data. Two features common to both models are gently accelerating (almost linear) contrast transduction prior to binocular summation and suppressive ocular interactions that contribute to contrast gain control. With all model parameters fixed, both models correctly predict (1) systematic variation in psychometric slopes, (2) dichoptic contrast matching, and (3) high levels of binocular summation for various levels of binocular pedestal contrast. A review of evidence from elsewhere leads us to favor the two-stage model. © 2006 ARVO.

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. © 2007 VSP.

Binocular summation of contrast remains intact in strabismic amblyopia

PURPOSE. Strabismic amblyopia is typically associated with several visual deficits, including loss of contrast sensitivity in the amblyopic eye and abnormal binocular vision. Binocular summation ratios (BSRs) are usually assessed by comparing contrast sensitivity for binocular stimuli (sens BIN) with that measured in the good eye alone (sensGOOD), giving BSR = sensBIN/sensGOOD. This calculation provides an operational index of clinical binocular function, but does not assess whether neuronal mechanisms for binocular summation of contrast remain intact. This study was conducted to investigate this question. METHODS. Horizontal sine-wave gratings were used as stimuli (3 or 9 cyc/deg; 200 ms), and the conventional method of assessment (above) was compared with one in which the contrast in the amblyopic eye was adjusted (normalized) to equate monocular sensitivities. RESULTS. In nine strabismic amblyopes (mean age, 32 years), the results confirmed that the BSR was close to unity when the conventional method was used (little or no binocular advantage), but increased to approximately √2 or higher when the normalization method was used. The results were similar to those for normal control subjects (n = 3; mean age, 38 years) and were consistent with the physiological summation of contrast between the eyes. When the normal observers performed the experiments with a neutral-density (ND) filter in front of one eye, their performance was similar to that of the amblyopes in both methods of assessment. CONCLUSIONS. The results indicate that strabismic amblyopes have mechanisms for binocular summation of contrast and that the amblyopic deficits of binocularity can be simulated with an ND filter. The implications of these results for best clinical practice are discussed. Copyright © Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology.

Interocular suppression and contrast gain control in human vision

The human visual system combines contrast information from the two eyes to produce a single cyclopean representation of the external world. This task requires both summation of congruent images and inhibition of incongruent images across the eyes. These processes were explored psychophysically using narrowband sinusoidal grating stimuli. Initial experiments focussed on binocular interactions within a single detecting mechanism, using contrast discrimination and contrast matching tasks. Consistent with previous findings, dichoptic presentation produced greater masking than monocular or binocular presentation. Four computational models were compared, two of which performed well on all data sets. Suppression between mechanisms was then investigated, using orthogonal and oblique stimuli. Two distinct suppressive pathways were identified, corresponding to monocular and dichoptic presentation. Both pathways impact prior to binocular summation of signals, and differ in their strengths, tuning, and response to adaptation, consistent with recent single-cell findings in cat. Strikingly, the magnitude of dichoptic masking was found to be spatiotemporally scale invariant, whereas monocular masking was dependent on stimulus speed. Interocular suppression was further explored using a novel manipulation, whereby stimuli were presented in dichoptic antiphase. Consistent with the predictions of a computational model, this produced weaker masking than in-phase presentation. This allowed the bandwidths of suppression to be measured without the complicating factor of additive combination of mask and test. Finally, contrast vision in strabismic amblyopia was investigated. Although amblyopes are generally believed to have impaired binocular vision, binocular summation was shown to be intact when stimuli were normalized for interocular sensitivity differences. An alternative account of amblyopia was developed, in which signals in the affected eye are subject to attenuation and additive noise prior to binocular combination.

Nonlinearities in the binocular combination of luminance and contrast

We studied the rules by which visual responses to luminous targets are combined across the two eyes. Previous work has found very different forms of binocular combination for targets defined by increments and by decrements of luminance, with decrement data implying a severe nonlinearity before binocular combination. We ask whether this difference is due to the luminance of the target, the luminance of the background, or the sign of the luminance excursion. We estimated the pre-binocular nonlinearity (power exponent) by fitting a computational model to ocular equibrightness matches. The severity of the nonlinearity had a monotonic dependence on the signed difference between target and background luminance. For dual targets, in which there was both a luminance increment and a luminance decrement (e.g. contrast), perception was governed largely by the decrement. The asymmetry in the nonlinearities derived from the subjective matching data made a clear prediction for visual performance: there should be more binocular summation for detecting luminance increments than for detecting luminance decrements. This prediction was confirmed by the results of a subsequent experiment. We discuss the relation between these results and luminance nonlinearities such as a logarithmic transform, as well as the involvement of contemporary model architectures of binocular vision.

The influence of high contrast acuity and normalised low contrast acuity upon self-reported situation avoidance and driving crashes

The aim of this study was to determine the cues used to signal avoidance of difficult driving situations and to test the hypothesis that drivers with relatively poor high contrast visual acuity (HCVA) have fewer crashes than drivers with relatively poor normalised low contrast visual acuity (NLCVA). This is because those with poorer HCVA are well aware of their difficulties and avoid dangerous driving situations while those poorer NLCVA are often unaware of the extent of their problem. Age, self-reported situation avoidance and HCVA were collected during a practice based study of 690 drivers. Screening was also carried out on 7254 drivers at various venues, mainly motorway sites, throughout the UK. Age, self-reported situation avoidance and prior crash involvement were recorded and Titmus vision screeners were used to measure HCVA and NLCVA. Situation avoidance increased in reduced visibility conditions and was influenced by age and HCVA. Only half of the drivers used visual cues to signal situation avoidance and most of these drivers used high rather than low contrast cues. A statistical model designed to remove confounding interrelationships between variables showed, for drivers that did not report situation avoidance, that crash involvement decreased for drivers with below average HCVA and increased for those with below average NLCVA. These relationships accounted for less than 1% of the crash variance, so the hypothesis was not strongly supported. © 2002 The College of Optometrists.

Effect of lutein and antioxidant dietary supplementation on contrast sensitivity in age-related macular disease:A randomized controlled trial

Objective: The aim of the study is to determine the effect of lutein combined with vitamin and mineral supplementation on contrast sensitivity in people with age-related macular disease (ARMD). Design: A prospective, 9-month, double-masked randomized controlled trial. Setting: Aston University, Birmingham, UK and a UK optometric clinical practice. Subjects: Age-related maculopathy (ARM) and atrophic age-related macular degeneration (AMD) participants were randomized (using a random number generator) to either placebo (n = 10) or active (n=15) groups. Three of the placebo group and two of the active group dropped out. Interventions: The active group supplemented daily with 6 mg lutein combined with vitamins and minerals. The outcome measure was contrast sensitivity (CS) measured using the Pelli-Robson chart, for which the study had 80% power at the 5% significance level to detect a change of 0.3log units. Results: The CS score increased by 0.07 ± 0.07 and decreased by 0.02 ± 0.18 log units for the placebo and active groups, respectively. The difference between these values is not statistically significant (z = 0.903, P = 0.376). Conclusion: The results suggest that 6 mg of lutein supplementation in combination with other antioxidants is not beneficial for this group. Further work is required to establish optimum dosage levels.

Distinct contrast response functions in striate and extra-striate regions of visual cortex revealed with magnetoencephalography (MEG)

Objective: To spatially and temporally characterise the cortical contrast response function to pattern onset stimuli in humans. Methods: Magnetoencephalography (MEG) was used to investigate the human cortical contrast response function to pattern onset stimuli with high temporal and spatial resolution. A beamformer source reconstruction approach was used to spatially localise and identify the time courses of activity at various visual cortical loci. Results: Consistent with the findings of previous studies, MEG beamformer analysis revealed two simultaneous generators of the pattern onset evoked response. These generators arose from anatomically discrete locations in striate and extra-striate visual cortex. Furthermore, these loci demonstrated notably distinct contrast response functions, with striate cortex increasing approximately linearly with contrast, whilst extra-striate visual cortex followed a saturating function. Conclusions: The generators that underlie the pattern onset visual evoked response arise from two distinct regions in striate and extra-striate visual cortex. Significance: The spatially, temporally and functionally distinct mechanisms of contrast processing within the visual cortex may account for the disparate results observed across earlier studies and assist in elucidating causal mechanisms of aberrant contrast processing in neurological disorders. © 2005 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Blur adaptation explained by a norm-based model of contrast adaptation

Adapting to blurred images makes in-focus images look too sharp, and vice-versa (Webster et al, 2002 Nature Neuroscience 5 839 - 840). We asked how such blur adaptation is related to contrast adaptation. Georgeson (1985 Spatial Vision 1 103 - 112) found that grating contrast adaptation followed a subtractive rule: perceived (matched) contrast of a grating was fairly well predicted by subtracting some fraction k(~0.3) of the adapting contrast from the test contrast. Here we apply that rule to the responses of a set of spatial filters at different scales and orientations. Blur is encoded by the pattern of filter response magnitudes over scale. We tested two versions - the 'norm model' and 'fatigue model' - against blur-matching data obtained after adaptation to sharpened, in-focus or blurred images. In the fatigue model, filter responses are simply reduced by exposure to the adapter. In the norm model, (a) the visual system is pre-adapted to a focused world and (b) discrepancy between observed and expected responses to the experimental adapter leads to additional reduction (or enhancement) of filter responses during experimental adaptation. The two models are closely related, but only the norm model gave a satisfactory account of results across the four experiments analysed, with one free parameter k. This model implies that the visual system is pre-adapted to focused images, that adapting to in-focus or blank images produces no change in adaptation, and that adapting to sharpened or blurred images changes the state of adaptation, leading to changes in perceived blur or sharpness.