Effects of vergence and accommodative responses on viewer's comfort in viewing 3D stimuli

Vergence and accommodative responses in viewing near objects in the real world are behaviorally coupled to maintain clarity and singularity for the object of regard. However virtual stereoscopic stimuli, such as in 3D displays, create non-normal coupling that may cause improper vergence and accommodative responses, possibly resulting in visual discomfort. The present study examined whether the dynamic aspect of current 3D displays is the underlying cause of visual and physical discomfort. To this end, subjects' vergence and accommodative responses were measured while they tracked an approaching 2D or 3D target, and while watching a 2D or 3D movie. The tracking target either moved in steps or continuously, and it was either clear or intentionally blurred. Results show that convergence insufficiency and improper accommodation were greater when a 3D target was moving continuously toward the near position compared to a 2D target and a 3D stimulus moving in steps. Clear targets also resulted in greater vergence and accommodative responses than blurred targets. Viewing 3D movie resulted in greater vergence and accommodation, as well as more severe vision- and motion-related discomfort than 2D movie. These findings suggest that with 3D displays, disparity-induced vision difficulty and internal conflicts cause perceived visual and motion-related discomfort. Characteristics of 3D stimuli, such as the frequency and amplitude of target motion, likely critically affect the severity of reported discomfort symptoms.

[1]  B. G. Cumming,et al.  Neural Mechanisms of Convergence and Accommodation , 1984 .

[2]  Jari Takatalo,et al.  Simulator sickness in virtual display gaming: a comparison of stereoscopic and non-stereoscopic situations , 2006, Mobile HCI.

[3]  H. Komatsu,et al.  Disparity sensitivity of neurons in monkey extrastriate area MST , 1992, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[4]  A. Parker,et al.  Binocular Neurons in V1 of Awake Monkeys Are Selective for Absolute, Not Relative, Disparity , 1999, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[5]  H A Rambold,et al.  Tracking in 3-D space under natural viewing condition. , 2008, Progress in brain research.

[6]  Peter Janssen,et al.  Extracting 3D structure from disparity , 2006, Trends in Neurosciences.

[7]  J Cooper,et al.  Convergence insufficiency: incidence, diagnosis, and treatment. , 1978, Journal of the American Optometric Association.

[8]  Bart Farell,et al.  Seeing motion in depth using inter-ocular velocity differences , 2005, Vision Research.

[9]  R S Mahto,et al.  Eye Strain from Convergence Insufficiency , 1972, British medical journal.

[10]  B. Julesz.  Foundations of Cyclopean Perception , 1971 .

[11]  James S. Wolffsohn,et al.  Target spatial frequency determines the response to conflicting defocus- and convergence-driven accommodative stimuli , 2006, Vision Research.

[12]  Mtm Marc Lambooij,et al.  Visual Discomfort and Visual Fatigue of Stereoscopic Displays: A Review , 2009 .

[13]  H Ohzu,et al.  Accommodative responses to stereoscopic three-dimensional display. , 1997, Applied optics.

[14]  T. Collett.  Vision: Simple stereopsis , 1996, Current Biology.

[15]  G. Poggio,et al.  Mechanisms of static and dynamic stereopsis in foveal cortex of the rhesus monkey , 1981, The Journal of physiology.

[16]  Masaki Emoto,et al.  Changes in fusional vergence limit and its hysteresis after viewing stereoscopic TV , 2004 .

[17]  A Duane,et al.  Studies in Monocular and Binocular Accommodation, with Their Clinical Application. , 1922, Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society.

[18]  David M. Hoffman,et al.  Vergence-accommodation conflicts hinder visual performance and cause visual fatigue. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[19]  F. A. Miles.  Binocular Vision and Stereopsis by Ian P. Howard and Brian J. Rogers, Oxford University Press, 1995. £90.00 (736 pages) ISBN 0 19 508476 4. , 1996, Trends in Neurosciences.

[20]  Clifton M. Schor,et al.  The relationship between fusional vergence eye movements and fixation disparity , 1979, Vision Research.

[21]  C. Schor,et al.  A dynamic model of cross-coupling between accommodation and convergence: simulations of step and frequency responses. , 1992, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[22]  Paul D. Gamlin.  Subcortical neural circuits for ocular accommodation and vergence in primates , 1999, Ophthalmic & physiological optics.

[23]  C. Schor,et al.  Binocular sensory fusion is limited by spatial resolution , 1984, Vision Research.

[24]  B G Cumming,et al.  Disparity-induced and blur-induced convergence eye movement and accommodation in the monkey. , 1986, Journal of neurophysiology.

[25]  Julie M. Harris,et al.  Speed discrimination of motion-in-depth using binocular cues , 1995, Vision Research.

[26]  E F FINCHAM,et al.  The reciprocal actions of accommodation and convergence , 1957, The Journal of physiology.

[27]  F. C. Donders,et al.  On the Anomalies of Accommodation and Refraction of the Eye, with a Preliminary Essay on Physiological Dioptrics , 1864, The British and Foreign Medico-Chirurgical Review.