A subscription to JoVE is required to view this content. Sign in or start your free trial.

Method Article

A Battery of Quantitative Binocular Vision Tests for Adults: Testing Protocols

357 views

⸱

DOI:

10.3791/70954

⸱

June 16th, 2026

 ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  , 
1Department of Kinesiology and Health Sciences, University of Waterloo, 2School of Optometry & Vision Science, University of Waterloo, 3Department of Psychology, Idaho State University, 4Department of Psychology, Neuroscience & Behaviour, McMaster University, 5The Multisensory Mind Inc., 6Center for Psychological Sciences, Zhejiang University, 7Centre for Eye and Vision Research, Hong Kong, 8Liggins Institute, University of Auckland

In This Article

Summary

Here we present a comprehensive battery of tasks to assess binocular vision. Tasks include peripheral stereoacuity and motion-in-depth, which are not assessed by current clinical tests. Incorporating these tasks will provide an in-depth assessment of an individual’s binocularity.

Abstract

Sensory fusion and stereopsis are two crucial components of binocular depth perception. Current clinical tests do not provide a quantitative measure of sensory fusion and assess limited aspects of stereopsis. More importantly, patients who show no binocular fusion in standard clinical tests can demonstrate binocular integration and perceive depth from binocular disparity and motion cues, suggesting that current tests are insufficient to examine all aspects of binocularity. A battery of eight tests is presented here to provide a comprehensive assessment of binocular vision. These tests are designed to refine and extend existing assessments by targeting different components of binocular processing. Specifically, letter ocular dominance and plaid motion integration provide quantitative measures of sensory fusion. Binocular integration in peripheral vision is evaluated using fine- and coarse-peripheral stereopsis tests, dynamic local stereopsis, and motion parallax. Motion-in-depth is assessed by dynamic local stereopsis, the Pulfrich task, and motion parallax. An additional da Vinci stereopsis test provides qualitative insight into binocular integration by measuring the occlusion difference between the two eyes. Exemplary results are shown from a participant with normal vision. Modifications to the current protocol can be made to accommodate specific needs and to support applications in broader populations.

Introduction

Binocular vision enables accurate depth perception through three hierarchical processes. The first step is simultaneous perception, in which the observer perceives information from both eyes. Subsequently, motor and sensory fusion occur when the two eyes are aligned and receive spatially correlated images. Stereopsis is the highest level of sensory fusion and relies on the processing of binocular disparity1,2. A range of clinical tests is available to assess simultaneous perception and motor fusion, for example, synoptophores, fusional vergence using prisms, and Worth 4-Dot (W4D) tests3,4,5. However, quantitative assessment of sensory fusion and stereopsis outside of central vision remains limited. The purpose of this test battery is to evaluate aspects of binocular processing that are not currently assessed.

Sensory fusion is clinically assessed using tools such as the W4D test and Bagolini striated lenses3,4,5. These methods effectively determine whether a patient achieves binocular fusion or suppresses input from one eye. However, they are qualitative and unable to differentiate between patients with varying capabilities in sensory fusion. The battery of tests proposed here provides a quantitative measure of sensory fusion and interocular suppression6 based on the letter ocular dominance test and plaid motion integration7,8,9.

Stereopsis can be assessed using various clinical tests, including the TNO, Randot, and Frisby stereo tests3,4,5. While these instruments provide quantitative measures of stereoacuity, they remain limited in several aspects10,11. First, these printed tests offer only a fixed range of disparity levels, separated by discrete steps. Second, stereopsis is assessed only within central vision, where visual resolution is highest12,13,14. Third, printed formats measure only static stereopsis. It is well known that the processing of binocular disparity and motion information is linked at a neural level15; thus, it is important to develop tests that incorporate motion cues.

All tasks in the proposed battery aim to address these limitations by applying rigorous psychophysical methods, including adaptive procedures and the method of constant stimuli. The battery consists of eight tests (Table 1), targeting different components of depth perception. The tasks are designed to provide precise estimates of the individual thresholds for sensory fusion, stereopsis in peripheral vision16,17,18, and perception of motion-in-depth19,20,21,22.

This protocol requires minimal equipment, with most components easily replaced with standard commercial materials or purchased from a specialized vendor for the mirror stereoscope. The response box is optional and can be 3D-printed. The full test battery is best suited to research environments where longer testing durations are feasible (approximately 85 min, plus instructions, practice trials, and breaks). Nevertheless, subsets of these tests can yield quick and valuable insights into specific aspects of binocular vision (Table 1) for researchers and clinicians, especially peripheral stereopsis and motion-in-depth, domains that are not currently tested in clinical settings. With a basic understanding of psychophysical principles and minimal Python programming, these tasks can be modified to suit different research or clinical needs.

TaskFeaturesStimulus eccentricityMethodologyFormal test duration (min)
Letter ocular dominanceSensory fusion3.75°Two 1-up-1-down staircases & the method of constant stimuli7
Plaid motion integrationSensory fusion0°3 one-minute trials3
Fine peripheral stereopsisCentral & peripheral stereopsis0° & 10°2-interval forced choice; 1-up-2-down staircases20 (4 min per location)
Coarse peripheral stereopsisPeripheral stereopsis5°15 trials per condition5
Dynamic local stereopsisMotion-in-depth; central & peripheral stereopsis6°2-interval forced choice; 1-up-2-down staircases25 (5 min per location)
The Pulfrich taskStereopsis from temporal disparityFull screenThe method of constant stimuli12
Motion parallaxOcclusion; motion-in-depth4°1-up-2-down staircases10
Da Vinci stereospsisOcclusion; binocular integration1.5°10 trials per condition3
Total test duration85

Table 1: Overview of tasks in the battery. Description of the eight tasks included in the battery. Note that test durations do not include practice and breaks.

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Protocol

This study protocol was approved by the University of Waterloo Office of Research Ethics (44843) and the McMaster Research Ethics Board (1733). All procedures were conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed consent was obtained prior to their participation. For specifications regarding the test stimulus, please refer to Supplementary File 1.

1. Prepare equipment setup

  1. Set up the mirror stereoscope as shown in Figure 1.
  2. Position the monitor at a viewing distance of 99.5 cm.
    NOTE: The viewing distance is the sum of three components: the distance from the monitor to one of the large mirrors, the distance between the large and small mirrors, and the distance from one of the small mirrors to the chinrest. At this distance, each pixel on the monitor subtended.
    Inverse tangent equation calculating angle, with conversion to arc seconds; formula visualization.
  3. Change viewing distance based on individual hardware, interested eccentricities, and a desired pixel size.
  4. Perform gamma calibration for the monitor for luminance, red, green, and blue separately.
  5. Measure the width of the screen in centimeters.
  6. Open PsychoPy Coder. Click the Monitor icon at the top for monitor calibration and settings.
  7. In the pop-up PsychoPy Monitor Center window, click New to create a new monitor. Input correct viewing distance, screen size in pixels, screen width, minimum and maximum luminance, and gamma values for grey-scale, red, green, and blue colors. Click Save.

Spectroscopy setup with optical excitation measurement on desk; computer with analysis software.
Figure 1: Experimental setup. Experimental setup showing a monitor, a mirror stereoscope, a chinrest, a response box, a keyboard, a mouse, and a numeric pad for participants. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

2. Start the experiment

NOTE: This step provides general instructions for running practice tests and formal tests. Specific instructions for each task are provided in steps 3–10.

  1. Open BinocularBattery.py in PsychoPy Coder.
  2. Modify the monitor information in the script, including monitor name, refresh rate, and resolution according to the monitor being used.
  3. Click the Run experiment button at the top.
  4. Instruct a participant to look through the mirror stereoscope.
    1. Ask the participant if they see a cross in the middle, comprised of a vertical line and a horizontal line. If not, ask the participant whether they need the vertical line to move to the left or right.
    2. Use the left and right arrow keys to move the vertical line towards that direction, until the participant sees the vertical line in the middle of the horizontal line. Press Enter to continue.
  5. Assign and input a participant ID in the program for the participant. At the Main Menu screen, use the numeric pad to select each task.
    1. Start by running a practice test.
      1. Provide instructions for each task as provided below in steps 3–10.
      2. Complete the practice test and evaluate results.
        NOTE: Some tasks do not provide accuracy scoring (i.e., letter ocular dominance, plaid motion integration, and Pulfrich). Refer to the Representative Results section for guidance on interpreting performance for these tasks.
      3. If practice results are below 80% correct (for accuracy‑based practices) or are unexpected (for tasks without accuracy scoring), press Enter and select the test to restart a practice.  
      4. Proceed to run a formal test when a participant’s results are above 80% correct (for accuracy‑based practices) or are consistent and interpretable (for tasks without accuracy scoring) for the last two practice tests. 
        NOTE: If a participant’s performance remains below 80% correct or inconsistent across several practice tests despite proper instruction, the experimenter should abort the task, as results may be unreliable.
    2. Run a formal test.
      1. Instruct the participant to perform the task.
        ​NOTE: Throughout testing, it is critical to remind the participant to maintain fixation on the fixation cross, if present.
      2. After completion, evaluate the results of the formal test.
        NOTE: If the results appear unusual, a second formal test may be performed to confirm the findings.
      3. Press Enter to return to the Main Menu and select the test again.

3. Run letter ocular dominance

NOTE: One formal test consists of two 1-up-1-down staircases and the method of constant stimuli.

  1. Present the letter ocular dominance stimulus as shown in Figure 2A Instruct the participant to fixate the central cross while paying attention to the luminance of two letters presented above and below the fixation cross.
  2. Instruct the participant to use keys 8 or 5 on a numeric pad to indicate which letter (top or bottom) appeared brighter while fixating the central cross.

Visual perception experiment; staircase procedure; contrast ratio graph; psychometric curve analysis.
Figure 2: Letter ocular dominance task and results. (A) Test stimulus. (B) Results from a practice test using the method of constant stimuli. (C) Results from two staircases. Black and blue lines represent contrasts at each step of the two staircases. Colored bars represent thresholds obtained from respective staircases. (D) Psychometric function from the method of constant stimuli. Dots indicate percentages of trials where the participant perceived a letter presented to the left eye as brighter at each contrast tested. The red curve represents a fitted psychometric curve. The intersection of the dotted lines depicts the estimated point of subjective equality (PSE). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

4. Run plaid motion integration

NOTE: Use the initial demonstration to familiarize the participant, then press Enter to start a practice trial.

  1. Present the moving grating stimulus as shown in Figure 3A. Instruct the participant to look at the moving gratings, which can move in 1 of 5 directions, as indicated on the screen, or in both left and right directions simultaneously (split).
  2. Ask the participant to verbally report the perceived motion direction and any change in the perceived motion while viewing the stimulus.
  3. Press and hold the corresponding number (1–5 for each direction as labeled or 0 for split motion) until the participant reports a different number.

Visual pattern perception diagram with bar graph; experimental results on response time distribution.
Figure 3: Plaid motion integration task and results. (A) Test stimulus. (B) Representative results. Colored bars represent the percentage of time when the participant reported each perceived motion direction as labeled, including split when both left and right directions are seen simultaneously. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

5. Run fine peripheral stereopsis

  1. Present the peripheral and central stereopsis stimuli as shown in Figure 4A,B. Use the Stationary task to familiarize the participant.
    1. Instruct the participant to fixate the cross, wherever it is presented on the screen.
    2. NOTE: Watch the participant’s eye movement to ensure that their gaze follows the fixation cross.
    3. Ask the participant whether the black square appears behind or in front of the white frame or appears on the same plane.
    4. Press 1 if the black square has depth, or 2 if not.
  2. Use the Regular task to practice with the 2-interval forced-choice task.
    1. Inform the participant that the stimulus will flash twice, and the depth will appear in one of the two flashes.
    2. Instruct the participant to report in which of the two flashes they see the depth.
    3. Press 1 or 2 based on the participant’s choice.
  3. Run a formal test with the same instructions as the Regular practice.

Stereopsis experiment; visual tests with disparity data charts; binocular disparity analysis.
Figure 4: Fine peripheral stereopsis task and results. (A) Test stimulus for the peripheral task. (B) Test stimulus for the central task. (C) Representative results. Red and blue curves represent staircase data for crossed and uncrossed disparities, respectively, at each location (0° and 10° eccentricity). Colored bars on the right side of each graph indicate thresholds obtained from respective staircases. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

6. Run coarse peripheral stereopsis

NOTE: Press the space bar to start a trial.

  1. Present the coarse stereopsis stimulus as shown in Figure 5A. Instruct the participant to maintain fixation on the cross.
  2. When the stars have disappeared, ask the participant the following questions: did you see depth?’ if yes, ‘were the star(s) appearing behind or in front of the moons?’ and ‘how many stars were presented?’
  3. Use the up and down arrow keys to select a response and use the left and right keys to navigate between questions.

Visual perception experiment diagram with results; bar chart of trial percentages and accuracy.
Figure 5: Coarse peripheral stereopsis task and results. (A) Test stimulus. (B) Representative results. Red, blue, and green colors represent data from crossed, uncrossed, and catch trials, respectively. Left bars represent the percentage of trials in which depth was reported. Middle bars represent the proportion of correct depth direction responses from trials where depth was reported. The right bars show the percentage of trials in which two stars were reported. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

7. Run dynamic local stereopsis

NOTE: This test contains four practice trials designed to provide step-by-step guidance to help readers become familiar with the task.

  1. Present the dynamic stereopsis stimulus and task interface as shown in Figure 6A,B. Start by running practice Task 1 (single location, single interval).
    1. Instruct the participants to look at the center, while paying attention to the target location as specified.
      NOTE: To help the participant understand the stimulus, allow them to look directly at the target location only during practice.
    2. Ask the participant whether the square moved closer to or farther away from them.
    3. Press 1 if the participant saw motion in depth, or 2 if not.
      ​NOTE: Horizontal motion does not count as motion in depth.
    4. For patients with better vision in the periphery than in the center, advise the patient to use their peripheral vision to look at the target location.
    5. If the participant is able to see motion-in-depth, proceed to the next practice task.
  2. Run practice Task 2 (single location, two-interval forced-choice).
    1. Inform the participant that the stimulus will now flash twice.
    2. Ask the participant which of the two flashes contains motion in depth at the target location as specified.
    3. Press 1 or 2 based on the participant’s choice.
    4. If the participant fails to see motion-in-depth reliably, reinstruct them and allow them to look directly at the target location.
    5. If the participant is able to see motion-in-depth, proceed to the next practice task.
  3. Run practice Task 3 (two locations, two-interval forced-choice).
    1. Provide the same instructions as Task 2, except that the target may now be at either of two locations.
  4. Run practice Task 4 (Full Practice).
    1. Provide the same instructions as Task 3, except that the target may now be at any of the four peripheral locations.
  5. When ready, run Dynamic Periphery and Dynamic Center for a formal test.

Static equilibrium concept, 2IFC method; experimental data analysis chart with visual disparity results.
Figure 6: Dynamic local stereopsis task and results. (A) Menu for step-by-step practice. (B) Test stimulus. (C) Representative results. Red and blue curves represent staircase data for crossed and uncrossed disparities, respectively, at each retinal location (0° and 5° eccentricity). Colored bars on the right of each graph indicate thresholds obtained from respective staircases. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

8. Run the Pulfrich task

NOTE: Luminance on one half of the screen is reduced (Figure 7A) to mimic neutral density (ND) filters.

  1. Present the Pulfrich task stimulus as shown in Figure 7A. Confirm whether the participant can see depth and whether the moons are moving in front of or behind the stars.
  2. Ask the participant to use the / or * key to move the stationary moon at the bottom of the screen forward or backward, until it appears to be at the same depth as the moving moons.
  3. Optional: ask the participant to indicate the amount to depth perceived using the response box (Figure 7B).
    1. Present the response box to the participant, facing the participant, with the center of the box approximately 40 cm away from their eyes.
    2. Ask the participant to move the slider on both sides of the box until the moons inside the box appear to be at the same depth as the moving moons on the computer screen.
    3. Type the reading on the slider onto the computer screen. Press + to move on.

NOTE: The physical response box is described in Supplementary File 2.

Stereoscopic vision experiment, diagram, disparity vs. filter strength graphs, depth perception setup.
Figure 7: Pulfrich task and results. (A) Test stimulus. All moons are in motion except the one at the bottom. (B) Inside view of the response box, showing stars affixed to the ceiling and moons on a rail. (C) Results from the disparity-matching task. Medians are indicated by black dots and orange lines. Boxplots represent the range (minimum and maximum) and the interquartile range. Note that because only three trials were tested per filter strength, the medians and extremes reflect all data for each condition. Blue lines represent linear regressions performed using median data across all filter strengths. (D) Results from the physical depth-matching task. Medians are indicated by black dots and orange lines. Boxplots represent the range (minimum and maximum) and the interquartile range. Note that because only three trials were tested per filter strength, the medians and extremes reflect all data for each condition. Blue lines represent linear regressions performed using median data across all filter strengths. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

9. Run motion parallax

  1. Present the motion parallax stimuli as shown in Figure 8A,B. Instruct the participant to fixate on the central cross.
  2. Press Enter to start a trial.
  3. Instruct the participant to report the square that appeared elevated in depth during the rotation, while fixating the central cross.
  4. Press the corresponding number for that square.

Parallax-disparity study with visual targets and threshold graphs; experimental data analysis.
Figure 8: Motion parallax task and results. (A) Test stimulus for the “parallax” task. (B) Test stimulus for the “parallax + disparity” task. Note that the bottom left square in this example (number “4”) contains a binocular disparity cue. (C) Representative results from the “parallax” task. Red and blue lines represent raw data from two staircases. Colored bars represent thresholds obtained from respective staircases. (D) Representative results from the “parallax + disparity” task. Red and blue lines represent raw data from two staircases. Colored bars represent thresholds obtained from respective staircases. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

10. Run da Vinci stereopsis

  1. Present the dichoptic stimulus configuration as shown in Figure 9A. Instruct the participant to compare the depth of the two bars relative to the large box and report which bar appears to be in front of the box.
  2. Press 8 or 5 for the top or bottom bar, or press Enter if they all appear on the same plane.
  3. During practice, if the participant sees depth in a catch trial, reinstruct them to ensure that they understand the task.

Visual perception study: 3D diagram, depth perception impact shown via bar chart, trial results displayed.
Figure 9: Da Vinci stereopsis task and results (A) Illustration of the test stimulus, showing two pairs of dichoptic stimuli. (B) Perceptual outcomes after fusion. By crossing the eyes, fusing the left and middle stimuli produces the illusion shown in (a), and fusing the middle and right stimuli produces the illusion shown in (b). Note that during each trial, only one stimulus pair is shown. (C) Representative results. Blue, red, and gray bars indicate the percentage of trials in which participants reported correct depth, incorrect depth, or no depth. Note that all responses were correct in this example; hence, no red bar is presented. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Results

Representative data were collected from a 20-year-old participant with normal vision (visual acuity 0.0 logMAR for each eye; stereoacuity 40 arcsec).

Letter ocular dominance
Results from two staircases and the method of constant stimuli (Figure 2C,D) indicate slightly stronger right-eye dominance for this participant.

Expected results: Each staircase should progressively approach its threshol...

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Discussion

This novel battery of tests was developed to assess multiple facets of binocular vision, ranging from simultaneous perception and fusion to distinct mechanisms underlying stereopsis. The entire protocol takes at least 85 minutes to complete, providing a comprehensive evaluation of depth perception. Tests may be administered individually or in combination, depending on research or clinical needs. The full test battery is best suited to research environments where longer testing durations are feasible. Nevertheless, subset...

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Disclosures

All authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) grant (PJT 183761) to EN, XG, DM, DIS, and BT. We thank the REWIRE-D Study Group (rewire-d.ca) for their contributions to the development of this work.

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Materials

List of materials used in this article
NameCompanyCatalog NumberComments
CodesN/Ahttps://git.uwaterloo.ca/hvnl/binocularbatterycodes_manuscript/-/tree/9f7ff9eb1705d50060ca46a8ac2d2d1848349368/The codes used to generate the stimuli and run the protocol are available at the repository provided in the "Catalog Number" column. 
ComputerAlienware, Dell Inc., Texas, USAXPS 8930Intel Core i7-9700 CPU, 64 GB RAM
Forehead and chin restN/AN/ACustom-built, used to maintain head position and viewing distance
Mirror stereoscopeN/AN/ACustom-built
MonitorLG Electronics, Seoul, KoreaLG 27UP600-WResolution: 3840 × 2160 pixels, screen width: 59.5 cm, refresh rate: 60 Hz, response time: 5 ms; gray background luminance was set to 340 cd/m2
Mouse and keyboardN/AN/AFor experimenter use
Numeric padN/AN/AFor participant use
Programming EnvironmentN/Ahttps://www.psychopy.org/PsychoPy 2022.2.4 (on Python 3.6.6), running on Windows 10 (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA)
Response boxN/AN/ACustom-built, please see Schematics in Supplementary Documents for parts required

References

  1. Ali, R. S. . Relationship between ocular sensory dominance and stereopsis. , (2016).
  2. Cibis, G. W., Ing, M. R. Binocular vision. Duane’s Ophthalmology. , (2013).
  3. Barrett, B. T. Assessment of binocular vision and accommodation. Clinical procedures in primary eye care. , (2014).
  4. Lee, J., McIntyre, A. Clinical tests for binocular vision. Eye. 10 (2), 282-285 (1996).
  5. von Noorden, G. K., Campos, E. C. . Binocular vision and ocular motility: theory and management of strabismus. , (2002).
  6. de Belsunce, S., Sireteanu, R. The time course of interocular suppression in normal and amblyopic subjects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 32 (9), 2645-2652 (1991).
  7. Hupé, J. M., Signorelli, C. M., Alais, D. Two paradigms of bistable plaid motion reveal independent mutual inhibition processes. J Vis. 19 (4), 5 (2019).
  8. Riesen, G., Norcia, A. M., Gardner, J. L. Humans perceive binocular rivalry and fusion in a tristable dynamic state. J Neurosci. 39 (43), 8527-8537 (2019).
  9. Dieter, K. C., Sy, J. L., Blake, R. Individual differences in sensory eye dominance reflected in the dynamics of binocular rivalry. Vision Res. 141, 40-50 (2017).
  10. O’Connor, A. R., Tidbury, L. P. Stereopsis: are we assessing it in enough depth?. Clin Exp Optom. 101 (4), 485-494 (2018).
  11. Tittes, J., et al. Assessment of stereovision with digital testing in adults and children with normal and impaired binocularity. Vision Res. 164, 69-82 (2019).
  12. Hubel, D. H., Wiesel, T. N. Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex. J Physiol. 160, 106-154 (1962).
  13. Rovamo, J., Virsu, V. An estimation and application of the human cortical magnification factor. Exp Brain Res. 37 (3), (1979).
  14. Spillmann, L., Ransom-Hogg, A., Oehler, R. A comparison of perceptive and receptive fields in man and monkey. Hum Neurobiol. 6 (1), 51-62 (1987).
  15. Nadler, J. W., Barbash, D., Kim, H. R., Shimpi, S., Angelaki, D. E., et al. Joint representation of depth from motion parallax and binocular disparity cues in macaque area MT. J Neurosci. 33 (35), 14061-14074 (2013).
  16. Verghese, P. The utility of peripheral stereopsis. Front Neurosci. 17, 1217993 (2023).
  17. Witz, N., Hess, R. F. Mechanisms underlying global stereopsis in fovea and periphery. Vision Res. 87, 10-21 (2013).
  18. Yildirim, C., Mehmet Mutlu, F., Chen, Y., Altinsoy, H. I. Assessment of central and peripheral fusion and near and distance stereoacuity in intermittent exotropic patients before and after strabismus surgery. Am J Ophthalmol. 128 (2), 222-230 (1999).
  19. Hess, R. F., Mansouri, B., Thompson, B., Gheorghiu, E. Latent stereopsis for motion in depth in strabismic amblyopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 50 (10), 5006 (2009).
  20. Mollenhauer, K. A., Haase, W. Dynamic stereopsis in patients with impaired binocular function. Strabismus. 8 (4), 275-281 (2000).
  21. Watanabe, Y., Kezuka, T., Harasawa, K., Usui, M., Yaguchi, H., et al. A new method for assessing motion-in-depth perception in strabismic patients. Br J Ophthalmol. 92 (1), 47-50 (2008).
  22. Tredici, T. D., von Noorden, G. K. The Pulfrich effect in anisometropic amblyopia and strabismus. Am J Ophthalmol. 98 (4), 499-503 (1984).
  23. Bossi, M., Hamm, L. M., Dahlmann-Noor, A., Dakin, S. C. A comparison of tests for quantifying sensory eye dominance. Vision Res. 153, 60-69 (2018).
  24. Bossi, M., et al. Binocular therapy for childhood amblyopia improves vision without breaking interocular suppression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 58 (7), 3031-3041 (2017).
  25. Elliott, D. B. . Clinical procedures in primary eye care. , (2014).
  26. Lanska, D. J., Lanska, J. M., Remler, B. F. Description and clinical application of the Pulfrich effect. Neurology. 84 (22), 2274-2278 (2015).
  27. Read, J. C. A., Cumming, B. G. Effect of interocular delay on disparity-selective V1 neurons: relationship to stereoacuity and the Pulfrich effect. J Neurophysiol. 94 (2), 1541-1553 (2005).
  28. Carney, T., Paradiso, M. A., Freeman, R. D. A physiological correlate of the Pulfrich effect in cortical neurons of the cat. Vision Res. 29 (2), 155-165 (1989).
  29. Wu, Y., et al. Two patterns of interocular delay revealed by spontaneous motion-in-depth Pulfrich phenomenon in amblyopes with stereopsis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 61 (3), 22 (2020).
  30. Reynaud, A., Hess, R. F. An unexpected spontaneous motion-in-depth Pulfrich phenomenon in amblyopia. Vision. 3 (4), 54 (2019).
  31. Kim, H. R., Angelaki, D. E., DeAngelis, G. C. The neural basis of depth perception from motion parallax. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 371 (1697), 20150256 (2016).
  32. Rogers, B. Revisiting motion parallax as a source of 3-D information. Perception. 45 (11), 1267-1278 (2016).
  33. Tsirlin, I., Wilcox, L. M., Allison, R. S. da Vinci decoded: does da Vinci stereopsis rely on disparity?. J Vis. 12 (12), 2 (2012).
  34. Blake, R., Wilson, H. Binocular vision. Vision Res. 51 (7), 754-770 (2011).
  35. Tsirlin, I., Wilcox, L. M., Allison, R. S. A computational theory of da Vinci stereopsis. J Vis. 14 (7), 5 (2014).
  36. Chen, X., Hall, K., Bobier, W. R., Thompson, B., Chakraborty, A. Transcranial random noise stimulation and exercise do not modulate ocular dominance plasticity in adults with normal vision. J Vis. 22 (10), 14 (2022).
  37. Chen, X., Bobier, W., Thompson, B. Short-term ocular dominance plasticity is not modulated by visual cortex tDCS but increases with length of monocular deprivation. Sci Rep. 13 (1), 6666 (2023).
  38. Li, J., et al. The role of suppression in amblyopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 52 (7), 4169 (2011).
  39. Hess, R. F., Thompson, B., Baker, D. H. Binocular vision in amblyopia: structure, suppression and plasticity. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 34 (2), 146-162 (2014).
  40. Christian, L. W., Nandakumar, K., Hrynchak, P. K., Irving, E. L. Visual and binocular status in elementary school children with a reading problem. J Optom. 11 (3), 160-166 (2018).
  41. Grisham, D., Powers, M., Riles, P. Visual skills of poor readers in high school. Optometry. 78 (10), 542-549 (2007).
  42. Mesfin, Y., Kong, A., Backus, B. T., Deiner, M., Ou, Y., et al. Pilot study comparing a virtual reality–based visual field test to standard perimetry in children. J AAPOS. 28 (3), 103933 (2024).
  43. Denkinger, S., et al. The eRDS v6 stereotest and the vivid vision stereo test: two new tests of stereoscopic vision. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 12 (3), 1 (2023).
  44. Kaernbach, C. Simple adaptive testing with the weighted up-down method. Percept Psychophys. 49 (3), 227-229 (1991).
  45. García-Pérez, M. A. A cautionary note on the use of the adaptive up-down method. J Acoust Soc Am. 130 (4), 2098-2107 (2011).
  46. I-BiT study group. Interactive binocular treatment (I-BiT) for amblyopia: pilot study of a 3D shutter glasses system. Eye. 27 (9), 1077-1083 (2013).
  47. Saraiva, A. A., Nogueira, A. T., Ferreira, N. M. F., Valente, A. Application of virtual reality for treatment of strabismus and amblyopia. , (2018).
  48. Chan, H. S., Tang, Y. M., Do, C. W., Wong, H. H. Y., Chan, L. Y., et al. Design and assessment of vision training using virtual reality. Digit Health. 9, 20552076231176638 (2023).
  49. Sun, X., Varshney, A. Investigating perception time in far peripheral vision. , (2018).
  50. Vera, J., Glazier, A. N., Dunbar, M. T., Ripkin, D., Nafey, M. Evaluating validity of virtual reality headsets for visual field testing. Vision. 9 (4), 80 (2025).

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Reprints and Permissions

Tags

Sensory FusionStereopsis TestsBinocular IntegrationMotion ParallaxOcular DominancePlaid Motion IntegrationPeripheral StereopsisPulfrich TaskMotion In Depth
A Battery of Quantitative Binocular Vision Tests for Adults: Testing Protocols
Contact Us
Recommend to Library

Privacy

Terms of Use

Policies

Copyright © 2026 MyJoVE Corporation. All rights reserved.