九州大学学術情報リポジトリ
Kyushu University Institutional Repository
両眼傾き対比の時空間特性
原田, 新也
https://doi.org/10.15017/1931675
出版情報：Kyushu University, 2017, 博士（心理学）, 課程博士 バージョン：
権利関係：
2 3
2
2
Howard & Rogers
1995 Howard & Rogers 1995
1 2
2 1
2 1 2
1
2 2
1
van Ee, R, Banks,&
Backus 1999
1s
3 1s
2
4 2
2
4
2 3, 4
4 2 3
VR
3D
1.1. 3 2
1.2. 3
1.3. 7
1.4. 9
1.5. 12
1.6. 15
1.7. 18
1.8. 20
2
2.1. 2 22
2.2. 1 26
2.3. 2 38
2.4. 2 46
3
3.1. 3 53
3.2. 3 55
3.3. 4 66
3.4. 5 72
3.5. 3 78
4
4.1. 88
4.2. 89
4.3. 91
4.4. 91
93 99
1.1. 3
a
5 3 c
3
5 6 c Z f 3
5 c
V1 Z f c b
6cf 3 6 c
f 6 8 3
5 67 5 3 672
c3 c
5 3 c f =
c cf 6
6 8cf 3
6 = fcf 6 a
c cf cue f f
f fc f 67 8 5
2007 3 cue f
= f 3 6 5
retinal cue c cf 5
extra-retinal cue 5 3 c
a cf 3
b f 3
5 6 = 3
1.2.
6.5cm f 6 3
f 6 5 2007 3
6 X
6 5 6 Y3
cf cf f f
stereogram f 2006 3
6 b 6=
f 6 3 1 a 6 7
6 3 b7 f 3
bc 5 0
f 6 3
X 6 b7 5 6 6 b7 f 3
1 b 6 7
6 3 b7
6 b 6
1 f 3
b7 f 3 1 b
b 3
HSR Y3 6 I D
HSR
S f Howard & Kaneko,1999 3
tanS= −!!!!"#!!!"#!! (1)
c 3 c
5 2 1 6 3 b7
b 6 2
f 32 b
0 1 =
cf 6 Gillam, Chambers, & Russo, 1988; van Ee & Erkelens,
1996a 3 0 1 2
f =
f 6 van Ee & Erkelens, 1996a 3 fc 0 1
2 6
6 3
3 3 a 0 b
1 c 2 f f 3 2007 3
3 2007 3
0 1
1.3.
f 6 f
f 3 c cf
3 b7
5 6 Y3 6
5 3
cf 3 a
5 a b
6cf 6 2007 3
=
6 = 3
b7 2 5 3 3
2 5 8 3 3 2 Z
673 67
b 3 3 6 o
x y , 3 XYZ . 2
5 3 X,Y,Z O Y
f 3 x,y 3
c 2 b cf 3
!= !!! , != !!!
3 c2 Z 66 O
Y 1990 3 c b7 x,y
X,Y,Z a b 3 3
2 5 f a
6 b 6 8 3
5 6 5 f
3 b7
f 6
cf 6 Alison & Howard, 2000 3
3 2009 3
1.4.
5 c
b7 6 6 3
=
b cf 6 3 8 4
5
b 6 f 3
6 cf 6
Howard & Rogers, 1995 3 f 6
6 f f 5
f
6 f 67 5 b7
6
6 f 3
66 a
6 f 6 Gillam, Blackburn,
& Brooks, 2007; Kumar & Glaser,1993; Pastore, 1964; Sato & Howard, 2001; Sato, 2004; van Ee & Erkelens, 1996b; van Ee, R, Banks,& Backus, 1999; van der Kooij and Te Pas, 2009; van der Kooij and Te Pas, 2010; Werner, 1938 3
5 =
6 3
f
b7 6 c 5 3
4 3 Schwartz, Hsu, & Dayan 2009 3
5 3 6
6 f 3 6
6 f 3
1.5.
Howard & Rogers 1995 6
6 6 3
f f
3Howard & Rogers 1995
8 6
6 3
3 6 3 1 0
f cf 3 2 1
5 3 1 6 f 0
6 b f 3
6
f f 3 6
f 0 1 f 3 3
5 3 2
6 2 b f 3
2 b b 6 6 3
6 f
f 3 b7 Howard & Rogers 1995
6 3
8 c 0 5 6 1 b
f 5 6 3
8
b f 5 Howard & Kaneko, 1994; van Ee & Erkelens,
1996a 3 6 f
c 6 3
b f
6 f
6 6 Gillam et al., 1988; van Ee & Erkelens, 1996a 3
f
f 3b
f 3
Howard & Rogers 1995 b f 5 3Howard
& Rogers (1995, 2012) c 6 b7 6
5 6 3 6 6
f
f f 6 3Howard &
Rogers 1995, 2012 bf
f b 8 c c
=
5 6 3 Howard
& Rogers 1995, 2012 fc 6 f
= fc
5 5 8cf 3
6 b7 0 5 6
1 6 c
6 67 van der Kooji et al., 2011 3 8
f 6 c
f f
63
( Howard & Rogers 1995, 2012 3
6 f 3 6
f 3
1.6.
van Ee et al. 1999 f f
6 3 5
f 5 3Howard & Rogers 1995
6 0 5 6
van Ee et al. 1999 =
c 6 3 c
6 6
3 8 c
6 6 3 6 c
X c
Y 3 6 3
7
c
cf 6 3
f 5
6 3 6
6 3 fc
f b7
van Ee et al. 1999 6 3
c c
6 6 6 3
5
6 6 3
van Ee et al. 1999
67 b f 6 Sato &
Howard, 2001 3
f 6 Sato & Howard, 2001 3
) 3van Ee et al. 1999 3
1.7. b f
6 f
3 b7
67 5 3
b cf 6 3Ogle & Weil
1958 f
c 6 3 6
f 6 3 8 b f
6= c 6 Alison
& Howard,2000; van Ee & Erkelens, 1996a 3 8 b7 1 b
6 cf 6 Gillam et al., 1988; van Ee & Erkelens, 1996a 3
b7
5 3 8 Ogle & Weil 1958
c 6
67 5 6
f 2000 3
6 f 6 3Kumar
& Glaser 1993 b7 6
8 6 3
6 3 Kumar & Glaser 1993
6 63
6 f
5 8cf 3
8 Kumar & Glaser 1993 3 f
f 6 3 1
5 2 5 3
Howard & Rogers 1995
6 f 6 5
5 3 3 6
67
b 3 4 2 3
2.1. 2
4 9 3 Howard & Rogers
1995, 2012 3 =
9 2
9 9
9
2 3
van der Kooij & te Pas 2010
3 3
4 10
3 9
9 2 10 9
= = 9
9 2 3
= 3 9 4
3 3 × 3 =
3 3 3 Howard &
Rogers 1995 3 3
3 Howard & Rogers 1995 3
3
2
2 van Ee Erkelens 1996b
9 =
3 van der Kooij & te Pas 2010 3
9 2
9 9 = 3
60 9
2 9 2 =
3 9 3
= van der Kooij & te Pas 2010
9 34 3 3 3
2
3 4=
9 Howard & Rogers
1995 0 1 3
9 3
3 3
9 a b 4 3
3
3 3 3
2 9
3 10 1 3 3
=
3 3
3 3
9 1 3
a b c d 3
= a
b
c
d
9 9 = =
9 = 4
2.2. 1 2.2.1. 1
a b 9
= 9
9 = 9
4 4 Van Ee et al. 1999
Sato & Howard 2001
9 3
2
3 9
3 4
9 3
9 3
10 2 3
1 2 9 4
2 3 9
3 3 9
.
3 3 9
+ – + –
– + + –
: 0
: 0
2
9
9 2
9 9
2 3
9 3
9
3 = 9 9
9
2
2 9
9 3 2 9
9 3
2 9
9 3
9 9
3 9 3
9
2.2.2. 1
20 33 6 5 11 2 4
2 3
=
2
Apple iBook G4 2 21-inch CRT Eizo
FlexScan T961
67.5cm 2 CRT
67.5cm 3 4
3 3 4
3
3 9
3 9 3 3
3
5.2 ×
×
3 14.75 cd/m2 2
0.06 cd/m2 2 3′ 2
3 4
=
3 3 1
0.62′
9 2
9 3
9 =
= 2
31′
3 3
9
3
3
4 1.9 3
2
3 143° 2 9
6.5cm
72 2
16′ = Pastore 1964
3 3 2
9 3 3
= 4 9
9 4 = 4
9 3
= 9 = 2 = 4
3 9 3 93 34 2 Sato &
Howard, 2001 3
9
±
9
4
1± 10 3 4
,2 9
3 2
19 ±
10
3 1± 2± 3±
2± 4± 60
± 2
± 4
2.2.3. 1
=
2SD 2 3
3.4 2 2
3 3
9
2
α 0.05 = × 3 α
0.05
11 a 11 3
9
= 3
9 3
2 F 1, 10 = 8.3, p = .016, η2 = 0.25
9 3
3 F 1, 20 = 12.5,
p = .002 2 3
3 F 1, 20 = 6.8, p = .017
2 3
3
3
3
11 b 11 3
9
3 2 F 1, 10 = 6.2, p = .032,
η2 = 0.050 3
3 F 1, 20 = 4.5, p = .046
3 9 =
9 3 2 3 9 3 =
3 2
9 3
3 2
Y
3 Rensink & Enns,
1995 4 3 van Ee et al. 1999
9
3 1
3 34 = 9 3
9 = 3
2 =
2 3 9 = 2
Nijhawan 1995 3
= 3 1
9 34 9 3
11 1 9 4 9
n=11
a b 9
2 = 3
3 *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.005
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
*** *
**
*
a b
9 9
9
2.3. 2 2.3.1. 2
2 3
2 12 a
b 3 Y
4
9 3 3
12
12 c , d 3
4 4
2 3
9 2 3 3
1
9 3
2.3.2. 2
21 33 7 5 12 2 4
2 3
=
2 12 4 7 1 3
× 9 1 2 2 3
342 12 a
12 b 3
3 9 3
1.0°
1.6 3
2
3 12 c 12 d
1
3 3 9
4 3
9
9 9 × 9 1 2 3
10 4± 44 4
± 4 2± ± 2
1± 2 ± 10
8 2 2
2
3 4 2 2
2 = 3 2
3 12
2
a
b
c
d
3 3
c d 3
=
3 2 9
2 = .
2 = 0 2 = 3 3
3
9 3
3 3.9%
13 a 12 3 9
2
9 2
(F 1, 11 = 11.6, p = .006, η2 = 0.25) 9
3 9
4 F 1, 22 = 12.5, p = .002
3 9
4 F 1,
22 = 8.5, p = .008 9
3 (F 1, 22 = 6.3,
p = .02 9
3 (F 1, 22 = 12.5, p = .002
= 1 2 1
3= 3
=
2 34 3 2 3
3 3 3
3 3 3
3 3 1 2
= 1 9
9 2 =
3
13 b 3 =
( -
W = 0.0882, p = .0002 = 3
°
3 ! 3 26.5 p ( 0001 Conover, 1999
2
9 3 =
p < .0001
13 2 9 4 9 n=12
a b 9
2 = 3
3 *p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.005
× 3 = 9
3 2
2 3
3 1 2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
*** * **
***
*** ***
*** ***
9
***
9
a b
2 1 3 3
3 9 3
1
9 = 2 = 9
= 9 = 3
3 3
= 2 = 3
9 9
= 34 3 =
1 3
9 3 = 1 9
3 3
2.4. 2
9
9 = = Howard & Rogers
1995 9 2 34
2 3
9 3
11 13 3 3
° 3 3
3 3
0 1 2 3 3
9.5 2 9.6
2 = 4 °
1 2 3
3 9 3 3 1
3 9
3 = 9
= 3 4.8 2
1,2 3 °
° 3 3 =
3 Cogan, 1979 Cogan 1979
3 2 Cogan 1979
3= 2 8 ×
2 Cogan 1979 31 2 Cogan 1979
3 2 = 2 Cogan 1979
2 4 2 9
9 = Howard &
Kaneko,1994; van Ee & Schor,2000 = 3 3
3 3
3 3
3 3
cyclovergence
9 = = 2 Howard & Rogers, 2012 1 2
3 3 9
3 3
= 9 4
3 9 =
2 e.g., Mitsudo, Kaneko, & Nishida,2009 93 9
30 ,30 × Howard & Kaneko,1994 = 3
3 3
2 ,8 × 9 =
3 3 9
34 3 3 1
4 9
= = 9
3
3 9
3 34 4 Van der Kooij & te
Pas,2010 Van der Kooij & te Pas 2010 3
9 = 9 =
Van der Kooij & te Pas 2010 3 3
3 9 3
3 3
2 3=
9 3 9
3 3= Van der Kooij & te Pas 2010
3
9
34 9 3 =
3 3
9 4 2 3
3 9
34 3 9 2
2 1 3 Pastore 1964
9 3 9 3
= 3 4 9
9 3 2 3 3 3 34
= < 9
9 2 9 9
9 2 3 =
9 2 3 9 34
3 3 = 3 =
3 9
9 2 3 = 3
3.1.
van Ee et al. 1999
n
n 8
c×
8
c 8 c
×
× 8
cn
8van Ee et al. 1999 n
n n×
8
n n
n 8Sato & Howard
2001 10s van Ee et al. 1999 1.5 s 8
n = Kaneko &
Murakami, 2012 8 n
1
n 8Kumar & Glaser
1993 n
n 8
b
8 n
n
n 8
n 8
n 8
van Ee et al. 1999 n
8
8
4203 4 3 n 8 ( a n 8 ( 0
n 8
n n 3
8100 ms 800 ms n
n ( c 8
8
(
n ) n
n 8
= n
8 8
a
b
c
n 8 ± n
n ± c
n 8
8 7 8 ±
8 1 8 ±
n b n 8
22 34 b 7 1 8 8
2 c n 8 n
n n 8
±
Apple iBook G4 8 21-inch CRT (Eizo
FlexScan T961) n 8
67.5mm 8 2 8
n
6.2656.26 b 8 3.16 8
n 8
n
1.7351.63 n
5.2355.23 8 n 64
1.7351.23
1654 = 8
206 8 4
453 n 38 8
2.1352.13 8 n c
× 8 0.946,
0.965, 1.036, 1.057 303 203,-203
-303 n6.5cm 8
n 8
64 80 880 41.53
8 n °
313 593 = 8 n
8
7.83
3.43 8
8
n Gillam, Flagg &
Finly, 1984 n n
n
8 Sato & Howard 2001 8Van Ee &
Erkelens 1996a Mitsudo, Sakai & Kaneko 2013
n 8
13 8 b
1.0351.83 n 33
8 b
n b n 8
= =
b
8
0.5350.53
8 n
n ”center” ”surround”
8 n ± ”0” n
n 8 700ms
8 100ms, 200ms, 400ms,
800ms 840ms 500ms
8 8
± ”4”b ”5” n n 8
8 ” ” n 8
4 5 4 5 2
32 8
8 b
° n 8
64 6 8
n 8
n n
-203 203 -303 303 n 8
n 8
n n
8
= t
n 8 nSt nSi
n 8
St = at[1-exp(-t/b)] Si = ai[1-exp(-t/b)] 3
at ai b 8
b ± n
8 ± at, ai, b
n 8
) , n 8
n
n 8 100, 200, 400,
800 ms 203,303 n 3 n
8 F (1, 7) = 9.8, p = .02, η2 =.31 F (3, 21) =
11.7, p = .0001, η2 =.05 F (1, 7) = 11.9, p = .01, η2 =.01
8
8 8
15 3
n n=8 8
n n 8
30° b n
20° b n 8
° n 8
n
n 8
b n 15 8 9
b 8
203,303 n 2 n 82
F (1, 7) = 10.2, p = .02, η2 =.32 3 3 F (1, 7) = 6.6, p = .04, η2 =.01 8
8
8
3 8
8
Kumar & Glaser 1993
8
203 303
8
n 8
100 - 800ms
8
n B.
J. Gillam & Pianta, 2005; van Ee et al., 1999 8
8 Kumar & Glaser
1993 8 =
8Kumar & Glaser 1993
c 3
n n 8
8
8
8
n n
8 n 4n 8
3.3. 4
3.3.1. 4
4 n 3
n
n n 8
n 3 n
= 2 8 n
n
n× n 0
8
8
3.3.2.
n 3 8
22 33 b 7 2 9 8
1 c n 9 4 3
8
3 8
4203 n c n 82
3 3
= 8 1.43 82
n×
= Howard, 2012 n 8
4203 82
2 8
(
8 8
8 0 8 1
2. 8 a
b
c
n R/P n 2/P 2 n 8 3
b n 8 °
n 8
2 5 4 5
2 16 83
2
( 12 )8 ° n
8 48 12 8
3.3.3. 4
16 c 9
b n 8 ,
2 ,
100, 200, 400, 800 ms n 3
n 8 F (2, 16) = 11.1, p = .0009, η2 =.09
8
1 F (2, 16) = 17.8, p = .0001, η2 =.05
82 F (6, 48) = 4.5,
p = .001, η2 =.01 a 8
3 n
81 ±
8
2 , 2
, n 2
n 8 F (2, 14) = 7.6, p = .006, η2 =.09
F (2, 14) = 14.0, p = .0005, η2 =.09 8
8 2
2
p < .05 82
2
p < .05 8
3 2
2
8 3
Kumar & Glaser
1993 8 =
×
a 8
n
8
=
8Sato & Howard 2010
n
n 8 Sato & Howard 2010
8 3 4 n
n 8 n
5n 8
3.4. 5
3.4.1. 5
5 3 4 n
n = 17 a 8
n
5 3 4
8
3.4.2 5
n 8
20 37 b 4 5 9 8
n 89 4 3b 4
8
2 8 4
4203 n c n 8
3
n = 8 672
n 8 3
82
4 2 = 8
2 5 4 5
2 16 82
2
8 8 32 8
+ )
8 (
8 0 8 1
2. 8 n
n 8R/R n
2/R 2 n 8 2
b n 8 ° n 8
a
b
17 b 9
b n 8
100, 200, 400, 800 ms n 3 n
8 F (1, 8) = 15.7, p = .004, η2 =.29 F (3, 24)
= 15.7, p < .0001, η2 =.06 8
8
4,5 n
8 2
,
n 2 n 8
F (1, 8) = 18.4, p = .003, η2 =.40
8 8
F (1, 8) = 5.5, p = .048, η2 =.04 2
8 8
3 5 n
800ms n
8 18
3,4 8
= 8
3,4 8
n
n 8
, )
8 ° n °
n 8R/S 203 3
n 2/S 2 R/P 2/P 2
4 n R/R 2/R 2
5 n 8 ° n 8
deg
3.5. 3
3.5.1. 3 b
8
8
8
8
8
3.5.2.
van Ee et al. 1999
8 n =
n 8
n 8
van Ee et al. 5 St
Std
Sid - Sip
c× Wipn 8
St = Std - Wip Sid - Sip 4 van Ee et al. 9
Sic Siu 8
van Ee et al.
n n 8
Wip Sip = Wic Sic Wiu Siu 5
Wic c× Wiu
c× 8 4 5
St = Std - Wip Sid Wic Sic Wiu Siu 6
Std
= 0
n
Siu = 0 8
n Sic = 0 8
St, square
8
St, square = - Wip Sid 7
n Sic = Sid 8
Wip = Wic Wiun b= St
8
St, perspective = - Wiu Sid 8 n
n
St, square ≈St, perspective n
c× Wiu Wip 8
3.5.3.
van Ee et al. 1a 6 Si ,
8
Si, = Wid Sid Wip Sip 9
Wid c× 8 5 9
Si, = Wid Sid Wic Sic Wiu Siu 10
n 8
8 Si,square = Wid Sid Wic Sic Wiu Siu
Si,perspective = Wid Wic Sid
n
11
Wip Wiu Wic n 8 = c×
Wid Wip 1 Wip Wiu
Wic 8
van Ee et al.
1999 Sato & Howard (2001) 8
3.5.4.
Kumar & Glaser 1993 8 Kumar &
Glaser 1993 8
n
n n n
Kumar & Glaser 1993 n =
8 Sato & Howard 2001
Kumar & Glaser 1993
n = 8 n
n Kumar & Glaser 1993
n 8Kumar & Glaser 1993
n
= Blakeslee & McCourt, 2008; Kaneko & Murakami,
2012, Robinson & de Sa, 2008 8 n
c
n 8
= Allison & Howard,
2000 Gillam, Chambers, & Russo, 1988 8
c× =
n van Ee, Adams,
& Mamassian, 2003 8 200
ms
c×
= 8
8
n 8
n van Ee et al. 1999 Sato & Howard 2001
8 =
8 van Ee et al. 1999
n n Sato & Howard 2001
n n 8
n
n 8
n = 8
3 303 203
n = 8
n =
= 8
303 63
8 n =
= 8Gillam Pianta 2005
73
a 8
8
n = =
n = =
8
1s
n 8 =
8
8
4.1.
2 Howard & Rogers 1995
3 van Ee et al. 1999
2
Van der Kooij
& te Pas,2010
Van der Kooij & te Pas 2010
3 3
van Ee et al. 1999 3
4.2.
19
3
Van der Kooij & te Pas 2010
4 4
19
4.3.
V2 V4
Thomas, Cumming, & Parker, 2002; Umeda, Tanabe, & Fujita, 2007
4.4.
VR 3D
Alison, R. S., & Howard, I. P. (2000). Temporal dependencies in resolving monocular and binocular cue conflict in slant perception. Vision Research, 40, 1869–1886.
Blakeslee, B., & McCourt, M. E. (2008). Nearly instantaneous brightness induction.
Journal of Vision, 8, 15.1–15.8.
Cogan, A. I. (1979). The relationship between the apparent vertical and the vertical horopter. Vision Research, 19, 655–665.
Conover, W. J. (1999). Practical nonparametric statistics (3rd ed.). New York, NY:
John Wiley & Sons.
Gillam, B., Blackburn, S., & Brooks, K. (2007). Hinge versus twist: the effects of 'reference surfaces' and discontinuities on stereoscopic slant perception. Perception, 36, 596–616.
van Ee, R., & Banks., M. S., Backus, B. T. (1999). An analysis of binocular slant contrast. Perception, 28, 1121-45
van Ee, R., & Erkelens, C. J. (1996a). Temporal aspects of binocular slant perception.
Vision Research, 36, 43–52.
van Ee, R., & Erkelens, C. J. (1996b). Anisotropy in Werner’sbinocular depth-contrast effect. Vision Research, 36, 2253–2262.
van Ee, R., & Schor, C. M. (2000). Unconstrained stereoscopic matching of lines.
Vision Research, 40, 151–162.
Gillam, B., Chambers, D., & Russo, T. (1988). Postfusional latency in stereoscopic slant perception and the primitives of stereopsis. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Human Perception and Performance, 14, 163–175.
Gillam, B., Flagg, T., & Finlay, D. (1984). Evidence for disparity change as the primary stimulus for stereoscopic processing. Perception & Psychophysics, 36, 559–564. 93
Gillam, B. J., & Pianta, M. J. (2005). The effect of surface placement and surface overlap on stereo slant contrast and enhancement. Vision Research, 45, 3083–3095.
Howard, I. P. (2012). Perceiving in depth (Vol. 3). Other mechanisms of depth perception. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Howard, I. P., & Kaneko, H. (1994). Relative shear disparities and the perception of surface inclination. Vision Research, 34, 2505–2517.
Howard, I. P., & Rogers, B. J. (1995). Binocular Vision and Stereopsis. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Howard, I. P., & Rogers, B. J. (2012). Perceiving in depth, vol 2. Stereoscopic vision.
New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Kaneko, S., & Murakami, I. (2012). Flashed stimulation produces strong simultaneous brightness and color contrast. Journal of Vision, 12, 1. doi:10.1167/12.12.1
2007
pp. 67-99
1990 .
van der Kooij, K., Te Pas, S. F. (2009a). Perception of 3D shape in context: contrast and
van der Kooij, K., & Te Pas, S. F. (2010). Shape contrast: a global mechanism. Vision Research, 50, 2455–2459.
Kumar, T., & Glaser, D. A. (1993). Temporal aspects of deth contrast. Vision Research, 33, 947–957.
Mitsudo, H., Kaneko, H., & Nishida, S. (2009). Perceived depth of curved lines in the presence of cyclovergence. Vision Research, 49, 348–361.
Mitsudo, H., Sakai, A., & Kaneko, H. (2013). Vertical size disparity and the correction of stereo correspondence. Perception, 42, 385–400.
Nijhawan, R. (1995). ‘Reversed’ illusion with three-dimensional Müller-Lyer shapes.
Perception, 24, 1281–1296.
Pastore, N. (1964). Induction of a stereoscopic depth effect. Science, 144, 888.
Rensink, R. A., & Enns, J. T. (1995). Preemption effects in visual search: Evidence for low-level grouping. Psychological Review, 102, 101–130.
Robinson, A. E., & de Sa, V. R. (2008). Brief presentations reveal the temporal dynamics of brightness induction and White’s illusion. Vision Research, 48, 2370–
2381.
Sato, M. (2004). A psychophysical study on the anisotropy and individual differences in human depth perception. International Congress Series, 1296, 97–100.
Sato, M., & Howard, I. P. (2001). Effect of disparity–perspective cue conflict on depth contrast. Vision Research, 41, 415–426.
Schwartz, O., Hsu, A., & Dayan, P. (2007). Space and time in visual context. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 8, 522-535.
2000 3
pp. 229-307
2006 .
Thomas, M. O., Cumming, G. B., & Parker, J. A. (2002). A specialization for relative disparity in V2. Nature Neuroscience, 5, 472–478.
Umeda, K., Tanabe, S., & Fujita, I. (2007). Representation of Stereoscopic Depth Based on Relative Disparity in Macaque Area V4. Journal of Neurophysiology, 98, 241-251
Werner, H. (1938). Binocular depth contrast and the conditions of the binocular field.
American Journal of Psychology, 51, 489–497.
