Do relative binocular disparities guide our movements in depth? In order to find out we asked subjects to move a ‘cursor’ to a target within a simulated horizontal plane at eye height. They did so by moving a computer mouse. We determined how quickly subjects responded to the target jumping in depth. We found that it took subjects about 200 ms to respond to changes in binocular disparity. Subjects responded just as quickly if the cursor was temporarily only visible to one eye near the time that the target jumped in depth, and less vigorously, though just as quickly, if the cursor jumped rather than the target, so the fastest binocular responses cannot be based directly on the relative retinal disparity between the target and the cursor. Subjects reacted faster to changes in the target’s height in the visual field than to changes in binocular disparity, but did not react faster to changes in image size. These results suggest that binocular vision mainly improves people’s everyday movements by giving them a better sense of the distances of relevant objects, rather than by relative retinal disparities being used to directly guide the movement. We propose that relative disparities only guide parts of very slow movements that require extreme precision.
KeywordsMotor control Binocular vision Latency Disparity Prehension Stereopsis Distance Human
- Cutting JE, Vishton PM (1995) Perceiving layout and knowing distances: the integration, relative potency, and contextual use of different information about depth. In: Epstein W, Rogers S (eds) Perception of space and motion. Academic, New York, pp 69–117Google Scholar
- Pélisson D, Prablanc C, Goodale MA, Jeannerod M (1986) Visual control of reaching movements without vision of the limb II Evidence of fast unconscious processes correcting the trajectory of the hand to the final position of a double-step stimulus. Exp Brain Res 62:303–311PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sedgwick HA (1986) Space perception. In: Boff KR, Kaufman L, Thomas JP (eds) Handbook of perception and human performance, vol 1. Sensory processes and perception. Wiley, New York, pp 21.1–21.57Google Scholar