Binocular non-stereoscopic cues in Randot and Butterfly stereotests

Published: 07-09-2018| Version 2 | DOI: 10.17632/g6z5svv6jx.2
Contributor:
Adrien Chopin

Description

Version 2: is only a simplified and cleaned version of the same data. This is a set of data collected in Geneva and Berkeley for different samples of participants, either neurotypic or amblyopic. We have measured stereoacuity using different stereotest: -the Butterfly Shape and circles in 3 viewing conditions: rotated 90 degrees, right-side up or upside-down -the Randot Shapes and circles in 3 viewing conditions: rotated 90 degrees, right-side up or upside-down, monocularly patched -psychophysical stereotests with no cues to depth that would not be stereoscopic (using single stimulus method with lines or constant stimulus method with dynamic random-dot stereograms) The goal was to test whether monocular cues were present to pass the clinical tests (in which case the monocularly patched viewing condition would yield non-random results), and most importantly whether binocular non-stereoscopic cues could be used to pass the tests (in which case the rotated 90-degrees viewing condition would yield non-random results), and then to see whether we could predict with accuracy stereoblindness in the psychophysical stereotests from the clincal stereotests (Randot and Butterfly). We found no monocular cues in the Randot, binocular non-stereoscopic cues in the two clinical stereotests and that they could not be used to reliably predict stereoblindness or stereo-impairment in the psychophysical stereotest.

Files