Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation

, Volume 7, Issue 5, pp 455–458 | Cite as

A device for inverting the visual field of animals

  • John Zimmerman
  • Martin Reite
  • Johann Stoyva
Instrumentation & Techniques


A device for inverting the visual field of small animals is described. Binocular lenses are mounted in a lightweight, aluminum frame which, in turn, is secured to a surgically attached, dental acrylic skull cap. The construction of the device, and its usefulness when simultaneous electrophysiological recordings are desired, is described by illustrating the details of fabricating such a device for a cat.


Visual Input Space Perception Aluminum Frame Perceptual Adaptation Inverted Image 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Blakemore, C. &Cooper, G. F. Development of the brain depends on the visual environment.Nature (London), 1970,228, 477–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Canon, L. K. Intermodality inconsistency of input and directed attention as determinants of the nature of adaptation.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970,84, 141–147.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Carr, H. A.An introduction to space perception. New York: Hafner, 1966 (Originalh published 1935). Pp. 59–91.Google Scholar
  4. Day, R. H., &Singer, G. Sensory adaptation and behavioral compensation with spatially transformed vision and hearing.Psychological Bulletin, 1967,67, 307–322.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Ewert, P. H. A study of the effect of inverted retinal stimulation upon spatially coordinated behavior.Genetic Psychology Monographs, 1930,7, 177–363.Google Scholar
  6. Ewert, P. H. Factors in space localization during inserted vision: I. Interference.Psychological Review, 1936,43, 522–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ewert, P. H. Factors in space localization during inverted vision: II An explanation of interference and adaptationPsychological Review, 1937,44, 105–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Foley, J. P. Empirical approaches to the problem of space perception.Psychological Bulletin, 1938,35, 409–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Foley, J. P. An experimental investigation of the effect of prolonged inversion of the visual field in the rhesus monkey (Macaca Mulatta)Journal of Genet Psychology, 1940,56, 21–51.Google Scholar
  10. Harris C. S. Perceptual adaptation to inverted. reversed and displaced visionPsychological Review, 1965,72, 419–444CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Held, R., &Freedman, S. J. Elasticity in human sensorimotor control.Science, 1963,142, 455–462.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Heimholtz, H. L. F., von,Treatise on physiological optics (Vol. 3) (J. P. C. Southall, Ed. and trans.). New York: Dover, 1962. (Originally published by Optical Society of America. 1924.)Google Scholar
  13. Hershbercer, W. A., &Carpenter, D. L. Adaptation to inverted retinal polarity What’s up, Bishop Berkeley?Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1972,94, 261–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hess, Eckhard H. Space perception in the chick.Scientific American, 1956,195, 71–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hirsch, H. V. B., &Spinelli, D. N. Modification of the distribution of receptive field orientation in cats by selective usual exposure during development.Experimental Brain Research, 1971,13, 509–527Google Scholar
  16. Howard, I. P., &Templeton, W. B.Human spatial orientation. New York: Wiley, 1966.Google Scholar
  17. Hubel, D. H., &Wiesel, T. N. Receptive fields of single neurons in the cat’s striate cortex.Journal of Physiology, 1959,148, 574–591PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Hubel, D. H., &Wiesel, T. N. Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex.Journal of Physiology, 1962,160, 106–154.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Kohler, I. The formation and transformation of the perceptual world. (Translated by H. Fiss).Psychological Issues. Monograph 12, 1964. 3.Google Scholar
  20. Robinson, J. S., &Voneida, T. J. Mask for controlling visual input in cats.Science, 1962,135, 962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Smith, K. U., &Smith, W. K.Perception and Motion An analysis of space-structured behavior. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1962Google Scholar
  22. Starch, D. A demonstration of the trial and error method of learning.Psychological Bulletin 1910,7, 20–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stratton, G. M. Vision without inversion of the retinal image.Psychological Rexiew, 1897,4, 341–360 and 463–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Taylor, J. G.The behavioral basis of perception. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1962.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1975

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Zimmerman
    • 1
  • Martin Reite
    • 1
  • Johann Stoyva
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychiatryUniversity of Colorado Medical CenterDenver

Personalised recommendations