Biomedical subjects

Sven P Heinrich

Publications and source records attributed to Sven P Heinrich.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Ocular prevalence and stereoacuity.

BACKGROUND: Most people attribute a higher weight to the input from one eye than to that from the other eye when they have to align stereodisparate objects in the same visual direction. This preference for visual directions has been termed 'ocular prevalence', according to the Latin praevalentia = superior power. QUESTIONS: (1) Is ocular prevalence of one eye (or its correlate, partial suppression of the other eye in the prevalence task) restricted to large stereodisparities, close to Panum's limit, or does it occur also at small stereodisparities, near the stereoscopic threshold? (2) Is ocular prevalence a handicap for stereoacuity? METHODS: Six non-strabismic observers with equal visual acuity of their two eyes were examined. To determine their ocular prevalence, they were presented with vertical vernier lines at stereodisparities ranging between 30 and 430 arcsec. They had to judge whether the lower, anterior line was located on the right- or left-hand side of the upper, posterior line. Their stereoscopic threshold was measured with an adaptive staircase procedure, using the Freiburg Stereoacuity Test. RESULTS: All six observers exhibited some ocular prevalence. It changed considerably on repeated measurements. In three observers, it even switched from one eye to the other. Ocular prevalence occurred not only at large stereodisparities, close to Panum's limit, but also at small stereodisparities. The stereoscopic threshold of the six observers ranged between 1.7 and 12.3 arcsec. CONCLUSION: Ocular prevalence is common, intra-individually variable and occurs even at small stereodisparities close to the stereoscopic threshold. It is compatible with 'optimal' stereoacuity. Hence, ocular prevalence appears to be a harmless feature of normal binocular vision.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Motion adaptation: net duration matters, not continuousness.

Motion processing is strongly adaptable. Adaptation strength generally increases with motion duration. Little is known, though, about the effect of motion onsets and offsets, which might be relevant if adaptation is not based on motion duration per se, but on the recent cumulated activity of motion-processing mechanisms. Thus, we presented intermittent motion with three different onset rates for adaptation. The duty cycle was kept constant at 33% while the rate of motion onsets was either 1.4, 2.8, or 5.6 per second. Stationary stimuli and continuous motion were used as reference conditions. The amplitude of the N2 component of human motion visual evoked potentials was used to quantify adaptation. All three onset rates induced virtually identical amounts of adaptation (occipitally, P=0.71; occipito-temporally, P=0.27), suggesting that the continuousness of the stimulus does not play an important role in motion adaptation. This was confirmed by measuring the motion aftereffect psychophysically.

Adaptation, Physiological↗

PubMed2005

Pattern specificity of human visual motion processing.

Visual motion processing is strongly susceptible to adaptation. A variety of patterns have been used as stimuli in previous studies. Three of these, namely random dots, barcode-like gratings, and sinusoidal gratings, were compared in the present study using motion-onset visual evoked potentials (VEPs). We assessed the effects of the adaptation pattern and the test pattern to which the VEP is recorded. Furthermore, we evaluated the interaction between both, i.e. whether differences between adaptation and test pattern affect the response. Isodirectional and antidirectional adaptation were used to differentiate between the actual motion adaptation and associated flicker adaptation. Motion adaptation was almost 2.5-fold stronger (p < 0.01) if the same rather than different pattern types were used for both adaptation and test. This implies that separate neural populations are involved, suggesting the presence of pattern-tuned motion mechanisms.

Adaptation, Ocular↗

PubMed2004

Vernier acuity for stereodisparate objects and ocular prevalence.

QUESTION: How precisely can objects, located in different depth planes, be aligned to the same visual direction? METHODS: Twenty normal observers were presented with vertical Vernier lines at various stereodisparities. They had to judge whether the lower, anterior line was located on the right- or left-hand side of the upper, posterior line. RESULTS: Over a stereodisparity range from zero to 62'', the threshold for detecting a lateral offset between the Vernier lines remained at the "hyperacuity" level of about 7''. With larger stereodisparities, the threshold increased about fourfold, probably due to a mutual, partial suppression of the position signals from the right and left eyes. The reference point from which the observers judged the relative visual directions between stereodisparate objects was not located midway between the eyes; rather, it was often decentred towards the right or the left eye, meaning that the observers had an "ocular prevalence". Their ocular prevalence was, however, not strong enough to have an effect on the Vernier acuity for stereodisparate objects. (Under pathological conditions like strabismic amblyopia, one should expect a 100% prevalence of the good eye, implying that the Vernier acuity reaches the monocular level, irrespective of any depth difference between objects.) CONCLUSION: Vernier acuity decreases with increasing stereodisparity. Ocular prevalence, occurring frequently among persons with normal eyes, has no effect on Vernier acuity for stereodisparate objects. For a typical everyday viewing condition, the reduced Vernier acuity beyond a stereodisparity of 62'' means that, from a viewing distance of 40 cm, precision mechanics have to guide their instrument as close as 0.4mm to a workpiece, until they can utilise their best position acuity.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

High-frequency oscillations in human visual cortex do not mirror retinal frequencies.

Flash stimulation elicits oscillatory responses above 100 Hz in human visual cortex. It has been proposed that these are the result of retinal oscillations being directly relayed through the visual pathway to area V1. Experimental evidence, however, is scarce and contradictory. To address this issue, we performed a time-frequency analysis of simultaneously recorded retinal and cortical potentials. Matching frequencies would support the assumption of a direct relationship between retinal and cortical activities. In 4 of 7 subjects the frequency was significantly lower in the cortex than in the retina and in one subject it was significantly higher. The differences were in the range of 10-34 Hz and suggest that the cortical oscillations are not a simple echo of their retinal counterparts.

Electroencephalography↗

PubMed2004

Electrophysiological evidence for independent speed channels in human motion processing.

A variety of psychophysical studies suggests that motion perception in humans is mediated by at least two speed-tuned channels. To study the neurophysiological underpinnings of these channels in the human visual cortex, we recorded visual evoked potentials (VEPs) to motion onset. We applied an adaptation paradigm that allowed us (a) to isolate and extract direction-specific cortical responses and (b) to assess cross-adaptation in the speed domain. VEPs resulting from the onset of left- or rightward motion at either low or high speeds were recorded from three occipital recording sites in 11 subjects. For each of these test stimuli, responses were collected after adaptation to one of five different conditions: a static adaptation pattern (baseline), adaptation to low-speed motion (3.5 degrees/s) either in the same or in the opposite direction as the test, or adaptation to high-speed motion (32 degrees/s) either in the same or in the opposite direction as the test. We report considerable direction-specific adaptation for same adaptation and test speeds (by 28-37% of baseline response; p <.002), whereas there was no direction-specific adaptation across speeds. We supplement these electrophysiological data with corresponding psychophysical results. The lack of direction-specific cross-adaptation in the speed domain demonstrated with physiological and psychophysical techniques supports models of at least two speed-tuned channels in the human motion system.

Adaptation, Ocular↗

PubMed2003

Adaptation characteristics of steady-state motion visual evoked potentials.

OBJECTIVE: Motion visual evoked potentials (motion VEPs) are used in clinical diagnosis and basic research. Employing steady-state rather than the usual transient motion VEPs simplifies statistical evaluation and might drastically reduce examination durations. Protocols for recording transient motion-onset VEPs usually involve fairly long recovery intervals between trials to avoid neural adaptation. This is not feasible for steady-state VEPs. We investigated how adaptation affects the steady-state motion VEP. METHODS: Oscillatory (13.3rev/s) and continuous uni-directional random-dot motion served as adaptation stimuli. Steady-state motion VEPs and, for comparison, transient motion VEPs were recorded. RESULTS: In the first experiment, we investigated how adaptation affects the recordings. Contrary to our expectation, we did not find any sizable effect. However, there was a large inter-individual variability in steady-state amplitude and no correlation across subjects between transient and steady-state amplitude. In the second experiment, we confirmed that the steady-state VEP reflects veridical motion processing by assessing its susceptibility to uni-directional pre-adaptation. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, the results suggest that steady-state motion VEPs provide a fast method of recording motion responses without suffering from adaptation, but at the expense of inter-individual reproducibility.

Adaptation, Physiological↗