Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2rsb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T07:36:59.611Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Depth from shading and disparity in humans and monkeys

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 July 2007

YING ZHANG,
VERONICA S. WEINER,
WARREN M. SLOCUM and
PETER H. SCHILLER
YING ZHANG
Affiliation:
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts
VERONICA S. WEINER
Affiliation:
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts
WARREN M. SLOCUM
Affiliation:
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts
PETER H. SCHILLER
Affiliation:
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A stimulus display was devised that enabled us to examine how effectively monkeys and humans can process shading and disparity cues for depth perception. The display allowed us to present these cues separately, in concert and in conflict with each other. An oddities discrimination task was used. Humans as well as monkeys were able to utilize both shading and disparity cues but shading cues were more effectively processed by humans. Humans and monkeys performed better and faster when the two cues were presented conjointly rather than singly. Performance was significantly degraded when the two cues were presented in conflict with each other suggesting that these cues are processed interactively at higher levels in the visual system. The fact that monkeys can effectively utilize depth information derived from shading and disparity indicates that they are a good animal model for the study of the neural mechanisms that underlie the processing of these two depth cues.

Keywords

VisionDepth PerceptionStereopsis; Rhesus MacaqueHuman

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Visual Neuroscience , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , March 2007, pp. 207 - 215
Copyright
2007 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Braunstein, M.L. & Stern, K.R. (1980). Static and dynamic factors in the perception of rotary motion. Perception & Psychophysics 27, 313–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruno, N. & Cutting, J.E. (1988). Minimodularity and the perception of layout. Journal of Experimental Psychology 117, 161–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cao, A. & Schiller, P.H. (2002). Behavioral assessment of motion parallax and stereopsis as depth cues in rhesus monkeys. Vision Research 42, 1953–1961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cao, A. & Schiller, P.H. (2003). Neural responses to relative speed in the primary visual cortex of rhesus monkey. Visual Neuroscience 20, 77–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Capilla, P., Malo, J., Luque, M.J. & Artigas, J.M. (1998). Colour representation spaces at different physiological levels: A comparative analysis. Journal of Optics 29, 324–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cumming, B.G. & DeAngelis, G.C. (2001). The physiology of stereopsis. Annual Review of Neuroscience 24, 203–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, R.D. (1999). Stereoscopic vision: Which parts of the brain are involved? Current Biology 9, R610–613.Google Scholar
Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, NIH Publication No. 86-23, revised 1985.
Hanazawa, A. & Komatsu, H. (2001). Influence of the direction of elemental luminance gradients on the responses of V4 cells to textured surfaces. Journal of Neuroscience 21, 4490–4497.Google Scholar
Howard, I.P. (2002). Seeing in Depth: Basic Mechanisms. Toronto: I. Porteous.
Howard, I.P. & Rogers, B.J. (2002). Seeing in depth, Volume 2: Depth Perception. Toronto: I. Porteous.
Laby, D.M., Rosenbaum, A.L., Kirschen, D.G., Davidson, J.L., Rosenbaum, L.J., Strasser, C. & Mellman, M.F. (1996). The visual function of professional baseball players. American Journal of Ophthalmology 122, 476–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakayama, K., Shimojo, S. & Silverman, G.H. (1989). Stereoscopic depth: Its relation to image segmentation, grouping, and the recognition of occluded objects. Perception 18, 55–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, A.J. & Cumming, B.G. (2001). Cortical mechanisms of binocular stereoscopic vision. Progress in Brain Research 134, 205–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pasupathy, A. & Connor, C.E. (1999). Responses to contour features in macaque area V4. Journal of Neurophysiology 82, 2490–2502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pasupathy, A. & Connor, C.E. (2001). Shape representation in area V4: Position-specific tuning for boundary conformation. Journal of Neurophysiology 86, 2505–2519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pasupathy, A. & Connor, C.E. (2002). Population coding of shape in area V4. Nature Neuroscience 5, 1332–1338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poggio, G.F. & Poggio, T. (1984). The analysis of stereopsis. Annual Review of Neuroscience 7, 379–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramachandran, V.S. (1988). Perceiving shape from shading. Scientific American 259, 76–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, B.J. & Collett, T.S. (1989). The appearance of surfaces specified by motion parallax and binocular disparity. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. A, Human Experimental Psychology 41, 697–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiller, P.H. (1993). The effects of V4 and middle temporal (MT) area lesions on visual performance in the rhesus monkey. Visual Neuroscience 10, 717–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sekuler, R. & Blake, R. (1994). Perception. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Stevens, K.A. & Brookes, A. (1988). Integrating stereopsis with monocular interpretations of planar surfaces. Vision Research 28, 371–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, H., Aiple, F., Fischer, B. & Latanov, A. (1992). Dead zone for express saccades. Experimental Brain Research 89, 214–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiner, V.S., Schiller, P.H. & Zhang, Y. (2006). How effective are disparity and motion parallax cues for depth perception in monkeys and humans? Journal of Vision 6, 343a.Google Scholar
Zhang, Y., Schiller, P.H., Weiner, V.S. & Slocum, W.M. (2005). Depth from shading and disparity in humans and monkeys. Journal of Vision 5, 407a.Google Scholar