Binocular Facilitation in the VEP of Normal Observers and Strabismic Amblyopes

1981 ◽  
pp. 323-335 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. A. Apkarian ◽  
C. W. Tyler
Keyword(s):  
Binocular Facilitation

Binocular facilitation in light‐mediated melatonin suppression?

2019 ◽  
Vol 67 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Spitschan ◽  
Christian Cajochen
Keyword(s):  
Melatonin Suppression ◽  
Binocular Facilitation

scholarly journals Disparity Tuning of Binocular Facilitation and Suppression after Normal versus Abnormal Visual Development

2009 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 1168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony M. Norcia ◽  
Julia Hale ◽  
Mark W. Pettet ◽  
Suzanne P. McKee ◽  
Richard A. Harrad
Keyword(s):  
Visual Development ◽  
Binocular Facilitation ◽  
Abnormal Visual

Binocular Facilitation of Discomfort With High Luminances

1966 ◽  
Vol 75 (5) ◽  
pp. 683-688 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. D. WIRTSCHAFTER ◽  
C. M. BOURASSA
Keyword(s):  
Binocular Facilitation

Stereoscopic mechanisms: binocular responses of the striate cells of cats to moving light and dark bars

1986 ◽  
Vol 229 (1256) ◽  
pp. 227-256 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Receptive Fields ◽  
Neural Mechanisms ◽  
Stimulus Contrast ◽  
Depth Discrimination ◽  
Response Profile ◽  
Binocular Facilitation ◽  
Receptive Field Disparity ◽  
Response Profiles ◽  
Preferred Stimulus ◽  
Binocular Depth

New knowledge concerning the internal structure and response properties of the receptive fields of striate cells calls for a fresh appraisal of their binocular interactions in the interest of a better understanding of the neural mechanisms underlying binocular depth discrimination. Binocular position-disparity response profiles were recorded from 71 simple and B-cells in response to moving light and dark bars. Predominantly excitatory (PE) cells ( N = 48) had disparity response profiles that were spatially closely similar to their respective monocular responses. In addition, the centrally located excitatory subregions were flanked on one or both sides by non-specific inhibitory regions, PE cells with a preferred stimulus orientation within 30° of the vertical ( N = 17) showed binocular facilitations with maximal values that were always more than twice (mean 3.3) the sum of the two monocular responses to the same stimuli and generally greater than the facilitations shown by cells with orientations more than 30° from the vertical ( N = 29; mean 2.2 times the sum of the respective monocular responses). The strength of the binocular facilitation depended on the stimulus contrast, the facilitation decreasing with increasing contrast. The receptive-field disparity distribution of the 31 PE cells capable of making significant horizontal disparity discriminations has standard deviations of 0.37° and 0.40°, respectively. Predominantly inhibitory cells (PI) ( N = 23) showed two basic types of disparity response profile: symmetric ( N = 17) and asymmetric ( N = 6). Uncertainty regarding the precise location of the binocular fixation point in the anaesthetized and paralysed preparation made it difficult to categorize PI cells adequately.

Binocular Facilitation in the Visual-Evoked Potential of Strabismic Amblyopes

1981 ◽  
Vol 58 (10) ◽  
pp. 820-830 ◽  
Author(s):  
PATRICIA APKARIAN ◽  
DENNIS LEVI ◽  
CHRISTOPHER W. TYLER
Keyword(s):  
Visual Evoked Potential ◽  
Evoked Potential ◽  
Binocular Facilitation ◽  
Visual Evoked

scholarly journals Binocular facilitation of cone-specific visual evoked potentials in colour deficiency

2017 ◽  
Vol 101 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeff Rabin ◽  
Andrew Kryder ◽  
Dan Lam
Keyword(s):  
Evoked Potentials ◽  
Visual Evoked Potentials ◽  
Binocular Facilitation ◽  
Visual Evoked
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document