IOVS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Regan, D.
Right arrow Articles by Collewijn, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Regan, D.
Right arrow Articles by Collewijn, H.

Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, Vol 27, 806-819, Copyright © 1986 by Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology


ARTICLES AND REPORTS

Visual field defects for vergence eye movements and for stereomotion perception

D Regan, CJ Erkelens and H Collewijn

An objective visual field can be mapped in terms of stimulus-induced eye movement. The authors used the scleral coil technique to record vergence and conjugate eye movements while stimulating different visual field locations with a 3 X 3 deg target whose image vergence was oscillated. For each of three subjects tested there was a visual field location where vergence eye movements were much weaker than in a control location of equal retinal eccentricity. On the other hand, conjugate eye movements driven from these two locations by lateral motion were similar. Field defects for ocular vergence coincided with regions in which oscillating retinal disparity failed to produce a sensation of motion in depth, although visual responses to static disparity were normal, and psychophysical thresholds for lateral motion showed no defect with either binocular or monocular viewing. It was concluded, therefore, that the perceptual stereomotion scotomata were not due to a monocular loss, but to a defective binocular interaction between motion signals from the left and right eyes, and that this defective interaction was specific for opposed rather than parallel motion in the two eyes. Furthermore, the visual loss was specific for motion rather than for position. The correlation between the field defects for ocular vergence and stereomotion perception leads the authors to suggest that the same defect in binocular interaction is responsible for both the eye movement and sensory abnormalities. Two candidate hypotheses are proposed: one is framed in terms of a single population, and the other in terms of two populations of cortical neurons.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1986 by the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology