Abstract
Vertical fusional movements elicited by stimulation of the non-foveal retina cannot be distinguished from movements elicited by foveal stimulation, except for a difference in the ratio between the amplitude of the response and the amplitude of the stimulus. This ratio is dependent on target configuration and on the retinal area stimulated. In some circumstances, if the size and richness of contour balances against the object fixated at the fovea, bifoveal fixation can be disrupted. It can be assumed that the stimulus for the motor response is made up of foveal as well as peripheral retinal stimulation. It is plausible that there is a gradient over the retina: the influence of the stimulated retinal area decreases from the fovea towards the periphery.
Zusammenfassung
Reizung der Fovea oder der Peripherie der Netzhaut verursacht vertikale Fusionsbewegungen, die sich nur unterscheiden im Verhältnis zwischen den Amplituden des Reizes und der Antwort. Das Verhältnis hängt ab von der Komposition des Reizbildes und von dessen Oberfläche. Die bifoveale Fixation wird unterbrochen, falls die Oberfläche der peripheren Reizbilder oder die Menge der Konturen genügend groß sind.
Es ist anzunehmen, daß sowohl foveale als periphere Stimulation der Netzhaut zur motorischen Antwort beitragen und daß der Einfluß des gereizten retinalen Gebietes vom Zentrum nach der Peripherie zu allmählich abnimmt.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bagolini B (1976) Part II. Sensorio-motorial anomalies in strabismus (Anomalous movements). Doc Ophthalmol 41: 23–41
Burian HM (1939) Fusional movements. — Role of peripheral retinal stimuli. — Arch Ophthalmol 21: 486–491
Collewijn H, van der Mark F, Jansen TC (1975) Precise recording of human eye movements. Vision Res 15: 447–450
Crone RA, Everhard-Halm Y (1975) Optically induced eye torsion. I. Fusional cyclovergence. Albrecht v Graefes Arch Klin Exp Ophthalmol 195: 231–239
Ellerbrock VJ (1949) Experimental investigation of vertical fusion. (Part II). Am J Optometry and Arch Am Acad Optometry 26: 388–399
Hebbard FW (1960) Foveal fixation disparity measurements and their use in determining the relationship between accommodative convergence and accommodation. Am J Optometry and Arch Am Acad Optometry 37: 3–26
Houtman WA, Roze JH, Scheper W (1981) Vertical vergence movements. Doc Ophthalmol 51: 199–207
Kertesz AE, Sullivan MJ (1978) The effect of stimulus size on human cyclofusional response. Vision Res 18: 567–571
Ludvigh E, McKinnon P, Zaitzeff L (1965) Relative effectivity of foveal and parafoveal stimuli in eliciting fusion movements. Arch Ophthalmol 73: 115–121
Lyle TK, Foley J (1955) Subnormal binocular vision with special reference to peripheral fusion. Br J Ophthalmol 39: 474–487
Nauheim JS (1957) A preliminary investigation of retinal locus as a factor in fusion. Arch Ophthalmol 58: 122–125
Ogle KN, Martens TG, Dyer JA (1967) Oculomotor imbalance in binocular vision and fixation disparity. Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia
Robinson DA (1963) A method of measuring eye movement using a scleral search coil in a magnetic field. I.E.E.E. Trans Biomed Electron BME-10: 137–145
Winkelman JE (1953) Central and peripheral fusion. Arch Ophthalmol 50: 179–183
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Houtman, W.A., van der Pol, B.A.E. Fusional movements by peripheral retinal stimulation (‘Peripheral motor fusion’). Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 218, 218–220 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02150098
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02150098