Effect of monocular sensitivity on binocular summation of luminance-modulated flicker.

Binocular summation of luminance contrast signals in the spatial domain has been investigated in many studies, but less attention has been paid to the analogous interactions in the temporal domain. The present study determined the impact of monocular sensitivity on the binocular detection of luminance-modulated flickering stimuli. Binocular summation ratios (BSRs) were determined in 13 visually-normal adults for a range of monocular flicker modulation thresholds (FMTs), generated by changing stimulus size (7'- 60') and luminance (mesopic and photopic). Monocular and binocular FMTs were measured at the point of regard and in each of the four quadrants at 5° eccentricity for each target size and luminance using the Flicker-Plus test. Monocular and binocular FMT's increased with decreasing target size for all retinal locations (p<0.001), and were overall larger for mesopic than for photopic condition (p<0.001). BSRs for mesopic (mean±SD: 1.50±0.21) and photopic (1.60±0.24) stimuli were greater than unity (p<0.001), with the latter showing larger estimates than former (p<0.001). BSRs showed no significant trend across target sizes for both luminance conditions (p>0.12). The results demonstrate that the visual system successfully summates inputs from the two eyes to enhance flicker detection, independent of their absolute monocular detection thresholds. These findings may serve as a predictive baseline for further experiments designed to determine how other stimulus properties and interocular differences in monocular thresholds may affect the binocular perception of flicker.

The magnitude of monocular light attenuation required to elicit the Pulfrich illusion.

In the Pulfrich illusion, the depth of a moving object is misperceived due to induced retinal disparity and/or interocular velocity differences arising from differences in luminance, contrast, or spatial frequency between the two eyes. These effects have been shown to occur both for visual deficits and for optical corrections that introduce significant binocular differences between the retinal images. However, it remains unknown to what extent the illusion might arise given normal variation between the eyes, such as natural interocular variation in pupil diameter (anisocoria). To assess this, we examined the threshold interocular retinal illuminance difference required to experience illusory depth in two random-dot fields moving in opposite directions in 24 normally-sighted observers with dilated pupils. Interocular difference in retinal illuminance was induced by placing neutral density filters of different intensities before the left eye. A minority of subjects (n = 8) did not provide meaningful data on changes in the experience of illusory depth with interocular difference in retinal illuminance and four subjects showed biases >±10% from the 50% point of subjective equality in the psychometric function. For the remaining 12 participants, the retinal illuminance had to differ by approximately 40% for the depth between the planes to become visible at threshold levels. This difference was approximately constant over a range of absolute luminance levels from 10 to 80 cd/m2. Our results suggest that while motion-in-depth illusions due to interocular differences in retinal illuminance may be pronounced in certain ophthalmic diseases or following certain optical interventions, it is unlikely to be manifest as a result of normal interocular variations in retinal illuminance. Further, our results also point towards the existence of substantial individual differences in the experience of what is otherwise thought of as a readily appreciable motion-in-depth illusion.