Adaptation to a random-dot stereograting with no monocularly visible contours produces a tilt aftereffect in a briefly-viewed test stereograting. The effect is maximal for adapting orientation at ±20–30° from the test orientation. Similarly, the perceived spatial frequency of a stereograting is altered by adaptation to a stereograting of adjacent spatial frequencies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BlakemoreCNachmiasJ, 1971“The orientation specificity of two visual after-effects”Journal of Physiology213157–174
2.
BlakemoreCNachmiasJSuttonP, 1970“The perceived spatial-frequency shift: Evidence for frequency-selective neurones in the human brain”Journal of Physiology210727–750
3.
BlakemoreCSuttonP, 1969“Size adaptation: A new aftereffect”Science166245–247
4.
CampbellF WMaffeiL, 1971“The tilt after-effect: A fresh look”Vision Research11833–840
5.
HubelD HWieselT N, 1968“Receptive fields and functional architecture of the monkey striate cortex”Journal of Physiology195215–243
6.
JuleszB, 1971Foundations of Cyclopean Perception (Chicago: University of Chicago Press) pp 225–237
7.
KöhlerWEmeryD A, 1947“Figural after-effects in the third dimension of visual space”American Journal of Psychology40159–201
8.
PapertS, 1964“Stereoscopic synthesis as a technique for locating visual mechanisms”MIT Quarterly Progress Report73239–243
9.
TylerC W, 1973“Stereoscopic vision: Cortical limitations and a disparity scaling effect”Science181276–278
10.
TylerC W, 1974“Depth perception in disparity gratings”Nature (London)251140–142
11.
TylerC WRaibertM, 1974“Generation of random-dot stereogratings”Behaviour Research Methods and Instrumentation7 (1) 37–41
