Contrast and stereoscopic visual stimuli yield lateralized scalp potential fields associated with different neural generators.

The use of dynamic random-dot stereograms (RDS) allows to investigate evoked potential components generated exclusively by cortical structures. We analyzed the scalp distribution of stereoscopically evoked or contrast evoked potential field by recording electrical brain activity in 20 channels simultaneously from an electrode array covering the occipital scalp areas. Evoked brain activity was obtained from 13 healthy adults with dynamic RDS stimuli presented as a stereoscopic checkerboard pattern in the center, or in the right or left visual half-field. Such stereoscopically evoked scalp potential distributions were compared to those elicited by a conventional 2-dimensional checkerboard reversal stimulus of the same mean luminance and retinal extent. We found that the latencies of the major evoked components were similar for contrast and stereoscopic stimuli, while significant differences were observed when we compared the strength of the evoked potential fields or the topographical pattern elicited by lateralized stereoscopic and contrast stimuli. The functional relation of evoked electrical brain activity to the retinal stimulus location was significantly different for stereoscopic and contrast stimuli. We present evidence that stereoscopic perception relies on the activation of cortical structures in the human visual system that are different from those activated by comparable contrast stimuli, supporting the conclusions derived from our earlier electrophysiological experiments on stereoscopic vision. These data on the physiological correlates of processing of stereoscopic information in humans are in line with the results obtained with single neuron recordings from the cat and monkey visual cortex.

[1]  W. Skrandies,et al.  Stereoscopic stimuli activate different cortical neurones in man: electrophysiological evidence. , 1985, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[2]  D Lehmann,et al.  Spatial principal components of multichannel maps evoked by lateral visual half-field stimuli. , 1982, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[3]  D. Lehmann,et al.  Reference-free identification of components of checkerboard-evoked multichannel potential fields. , 1980, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[4]  Janette Atkinson,et al.  Cortical binocularity in infants , 1980, Nature.

[5]  B. Julesz.  Binocular depth perception of computer-generated patterns , 1960 .

[6]  S. Holm.  A Simple Sequentially Rejective Multiple Test Procedure , 1979 .

[7]  W. Skrandies,et al.  [Stereovision in random dot pattern VECP: normal findings and clinical use]. , 1985, Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde.

[8]  Wolfgang Skrandies,et al.  Visual persistence of stereoscopic stimuli: Electric brain activity without perceptual correlate , 1987, Vision Research.

[9]  Wolfgang Skrandies,et al.  Visual Evoked Potential Topography: Physiological and Cognitive Components , 1989 .

[10]  G. Baumgartner,et al.  Development of stereopsis and cortical binocularity in human infants: electrophysiological evidence. , 1981, Science.

[11]  W Skrandies,et al.  Latent components of potentials evoked by visual stimuli in different retinal locations. , 1981, The International journal of neuroscience.

[12]  Wolfgang Skrandies,et al.  2 – Visual Evoked Potential Topography: Methods and Results , 1986 .

[13]  D. Hubel,et al.  Stereoscopic Vision in Macaque Monkey: Cells sensitive to Binocular Depth in Area 18 of the Macaque Monkey Cortex , 1970, Nature.

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

[15]  D H Hubel,et al.  A re-examination of stereoscopic mechanisms in area 17 of the cat. , 1973, The Journal of physiology.

[16]  W. Skrandies.  Scalp potential fields evoked by grating stimuli: effects of spatial frequency and orientation. , 1984, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.