Abstract
Utrocular discrimination, the ability to judge which eye has received monocular stimulation, was studied under conditions designed to reduce the salience of the cue mediating this discrimination. In one series of experiments, these conditions involved reducing the likelihood of motor command signals, overwhelming the motor command centers, and triggering motor command signals for both eyes. Those results indicate that utrocular discrimination is not mediated by ocular movements or command signals. In a second series of experiments, a visual masking paradigrn was used. A monocular test grating appeared superimposed upon a background of binocular masking noise, which was presented either simultaneously with the target or at some interval preceding or following the target (asynchronous masking). When presented simultaneously, the binocular masking noise interfered with utrocular performance, but only when the noise contained spatial frequencies near the test frequency. Masking functions obtained under conditions of asynchronous masking indicated that the time course of the forward and backward masking changed with spatial frequency. Finally, a sustained masking pattern that was ineffective in reducing utrocular performance could be made effective by pulsing the mask simultaneously with the target. Taken together, these results implicate a transient response to the target onset as a critical factor in generating the cue for successful utrocular discrimination. This conclusion may account for the fact that utrocular discrimination falls off for normal observers as the spatial frequency of the target grating increases above 4 cycles/deg.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Blake, R., &Cormack, R. H. On utrocular discrimination.Perception & Psychophysics, 1979,26, 53–68.
Breitmeyer, B. G. Simple reaction time as a measure of the temporal response properties of transient and sustained channels.Vision Research, 1975,15, 1411–1412.
Breitmeyer, B. G., &Ganz, L. Implications of sustained and transient channels for theories of visual pattern masking, saccadic suppression, and information processing.Psychological Review, 1976,83, 1–36.
Enoch, J., Goldmann, H., &Sunoa, R. The ability to distinguish which eye was stimulated by light.Investigative Ophthalmology, 1969,8, 317–331.
Georgeson, M. A., &Sullivan, G. D. Contrast constancy: Deblurring in human vision by spatial frequency channels.Journal of Physiology (London), 1975,252, 627–656.
Hobel, D. H., &Wiesel, T. N. Receptive fields and functional architecture of monkey striate cortex.Journal of Physiology (London), 1968,195, 215–243.
Lennie, P. Perceptual signs of parallel pathways.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, B, 1980,290, 23–37.
Lupp, U., Hauske, G., &Wolf, W. Different systems for the visual detection of high and low spatial frequeacies.Photographic Science and Engineering, 1978,22, 80–84.
Smith, S. Utrocular or “which eye” discrimination.Journal of ExperimentaIPsychology, 1945,35, 1–14.
Temvleton, W. B., &Green, F. A. Chance results in utrocular discrimination.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968,20,200–203.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by Grants BNS7817948 from NSF and EY01596 from NIH. R.B. holds a Career Development Award from NIH (EY00106).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Martens, W., Blake, R., Sloane, M. et al. What masks utrocular discrimination. Perception & Psychophysics 30, 521–532 (1981). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202005
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202005