The ability to estimate the distance of objects from one’s self and from each other is fundamental to a variety of behaviours from grasping objects to navigating. The main cue to distance, stereopsis, relies on the slight offsets between the images derived from our left and right eyes, also termed disparities. Here we ask whether the precision of stereopsis varies with professional experience with precise manual tasks. We measured stereo-acuities of dressmakers and non-dressmakers for both absolute and relative disparities. We used a stereoscope and a computerized test removing monocular cues. We also measured vergence noise and bias using the Nonius line technique. We demonstrate that dressmakers’ stereoscopic acuities are better than those of non-dressmakers, for both absolute and relative disparities. In contrast, vergence noise and bias were comparable in the two groups. Two non-exclusive mechanisms may be at the source of the group difference we document: (i) self-selection or the fact that stereo-vision is functionally important to become a dressmaker, and (ii) plasticity, or the fact that training on demanding stereovision tasks improves stereo-acuity.

Audio‐visual (AV) associative learning is central to many aspects of cognitive development and is key in reading acquisition. Most studies thus far have examined AV associative learning involving linguistic stimuli. Yet it is of importance to examine cross-modal learning free of familiarity confounds. We, therefore, designed an AV learning paradigm relying on novel, non-linguistic auditory and visual stimuli, which were both unfamiliar to participants. On top of AV learning, we collected performance in reading-related abilities, as well as in more domain-general skills, in a population of healthy Italian-speaking adults (N=57). By fitting trial-by-trial performance in our novel learning task, we demonstrate the expected variability in speed of learning (learning rate) across participants. We then show that speed of learning in our novel learning task is positively associated with working memory and replicate this result in a set of French-speaking participants (N=32), showing that it holds in another language.

Amblyopia is a neuro-developmental disorder of the visual cortex that arises from abnormal visual experience early in life. Amblyopia is clinically important because it is a major cause of vision loss in infants and young children. Amblyopia is also of basic interest because it reflects the neural impairment that occurs when normal visual development is disrupted. Amblyopia provides an ideal model for understanding when and how brain plasticity may be harnessed for recovery of function. Over the past two decades there has been a rekindling of interest in developing more effective methods for treating amblyopia, and for extending the treatment beyond the critical period, as exemplified by new clinical trials and new basic research studies. The focus of this review is on stereopsis and its potential for recovery. Impaired stereoscopic depth perception is the most common deficit associated with amblyopia under ordinary (binocular) viewing conditions (Webber & Wood, 2005). Our review of the extant literature suggests that this impairment may have a substantial impact on visuomotor tasks, difficulties in playing sports in children and locomoting safely in older adults. Furthermore, impaired stereopsis may also limit career options for amblyopes. Finally, stereopsis is more impacted in strabismic than in anisometropic amblyopia. Our review of the various approaches to treating amblyopia (patching, perceptual learning, videogames) suggests that there are several promising new approaches to recovering stereopsis in both anisometropic and strabismic amblyopes. However, recovery of stereoacuity may require more active treatment in strabismic than in anisometropic amblyopia. Individuals with strabismic amblyopia have a very low probability of improvement with monocular training; however they fare better with dichoptic training than with monocular training, and even better with direct stereo training.

There has been a long-standing debate about the mechanisms underlying the perception of stereoscopic depth and the computation of the relative disparities that it relies on. Relative disparities between visual objects could be computed in two ways: (a) using the difference in the object's absolute disparities (Hypothesis 1) or (b) using relative disparities based on the differences in the monocular separations between objects (Hypothesis 2). To differentiate between these hypotheses, we measured stereoscopic discrimination thresholds for lines with different absolute and relative disparities. Participants were asked to judge the depth of two lines presented at the same distance from the fixation plane (absolute disparity) or the depth between two lines presented at different distances (relative disparity). We used a single stimulus method involving a unique memory component for both conditions, and no extraneous references were available. We also measured vergence noise using Nonius lines. Stereo thresholds were substantially worse for absolute disparities than for relative disparities, and the difference could not be explained by vergence noise. We attribute this difference to an absence of conscious readout of absolute disparities, termed the absolute disparity anomaly. We further show that the pattern of correlations between vergence noise and absolute and relative disparity acuities can be explained jointly by the existence of the absolute disparity anomaly and by the assumption that relative disparity information is computed from absolute disparities (Hypothesis 1).

Amblyopia is a deficit in vision that arises from abnormal visual experience early in life. It was long thought to develop into a permanent deficit, unless properly treated before the end of the sensitive period for visual recovery. However, a number of studies now suggest that adults with long-standing amblyopia may at least partially recover visual acuity and stereopsis following perceptual training. Eliminating or reducing interocular suppression has been hypothesized to be at the root of these changes. Here we show that playing a novel dichoptic video game indeed results in reduced suppression, improved visual acuity and, in some cases, improved stereopsis. Our relatively large cohort of adults with amblyopia, allowed us, for the first time, to assess the link between visual function recovery and reduction in suppression. Surprisingly, no significant correlation was found between decreased suppression and improved visual function. This finding challenges the prevailing view and suggests that while dichoptic training improves visual acuity and stereopsis in adult amblyopia, reduced suppression is unlikely to be at the root of visual recovery. These results are discussed in the context of their implication on recovery of amblyopia in adults.

In some contexts, human learning greatly exceeds what the sparsity of the available data seems to allow, while in others, it can fall short, despite vast amounts of data. This apparent contradiction has led to separate explanations of humans being equipped either with background knowledge that enhances their learning or with suboptimal mechanisms that hinder it. Here, we reconcile these findings by recognising learners can be uncertain about two structural properties of environments: 1) is there only one generative model or are there multiple ones switching across time; 2) how stochastic are the generative models. We show that optimal learning under these conditions of uncertainty results in learning trade-offs: e.g., a prior for determinism fosters fast initial learning but renders learners susceptible to low asymptotic performance, when faced with high model-stochasticity. Our results reveal the existence of optimal-paths-to-not-learning and reconcile within a coherent framework, phenomena previously considered disparate.

Previous studies have employed different experimental approaches to enhance visual function in adults with amblyopia including perceptual learning, videogame play, and dichoptic training. Here, we evaluated the efficacy of a novel dichoptic action videogame combining all three approaches. This experimental intervention was compared to a conventional, yet unstudied method of supervised occlusion while watching movies. Adults with unilateral amblyopia were assigned to either play the dichoptic action game (n=23; 'game' group), or to watch movies monocularly while the fellow eye was patched (n=15; 'movies' group) for a total of 40hours. Following training, visual acuity (VA) improved on average by ≈0.14logMAR (≈28%) in the game group, with improvements noted in both anisometropic and strabismic patients. This improvement is similar to that obtained following perceptual learning, video game play or dichoptic training. Surprisingly, patients with anisometropic amblyopia in the movies group showed similar improvement, revealing a greater impact of supervised occlusion in adults than typically thought. Stereoacuity, reading speed, and contrast sensitivity improved more for game group participants compared with movies group participants. Most improvements were largely retained following a 2-month no-contact period. This novel video game, which combines action gaming, perceptual learning and dichoptic presentation, results in VA improvements equivalent to those previously documented with each of these techniques alone. Our game intervention led to greater improvement than control training in a variety of visual functions, thus suggesting that this approach has promise for the treatment of adult amblyopia.

The gold-standard treatment for childhood amblyopia remains patching or penalizing the fellow eye, resulting in an average of about a one line (0.1 logMAR) improvement in visual acuity following ≈120 h of patching in children 3-8 years old. However, compliance with patching and other treatment options is often poor. In contrast, fast-paced action video games can be highly engaging, and have been shown to yield broad-based improvements in vision and attention in adult amblyopia. Here, we pilot-tested a custom-made action video game to treat children with amblyopia. Twenty-one (n = 21) children (mean age 9.95 ± 3.14 [se]) with unilateral amblyopia (n = 12 anisometropic and n = 9 strabismic) completed 20 h of game play either monocularly, with the fellow eye patched (n = 11), or dichoptically, with reduced contrast to the fellow eye (n = 10). Participants were assessed for visual acuity (VA), stereo acuity and reading speed at baseline, and following 10 and 20 h of play. Additional exploratory analyses examined improvements after 6-10 weeks of completion of training (follow-up). Following 20 h of training, VA improved, on average, by 0.14 logMAR (≈38%) for the dichoptic group and by 0.06 logMAR (≈15%) for the monocular group. Similarly, stereoacuity improved by 0.07 log arcsec (≈17%) following dichoptic training, and by 0.06 log arcsec (≈15%) following monocular training. Across both treatment groups, 7 of the 12 individuals with anisometropic amblyopia showed improvement in stereoacuity, whereas only 1 of the 9 strabismic individuals improved. Most improvements were largely retained at follow-up. Our feasibility study therefore suggests that the action video game approach may be used as an effective adjunct treatment for amblyopia in children, achieving results similar to those of the gold-standard treatment in shorter duration.

Stereoscopic vision plays a critical role in visual perception; however, it is difficult to assess. In clinical settings, stereoacuity is assessed with clinical stereotests. Observers can use monocular cues to deceive some of the most common stereotests, such as the Titmus test. The Randot test has been found free of monocular cues, and here we confirm that result by testing observers under monocular viewing. However, there is a common misconception that only monocular cues can be used to deceive stereotests. Here we demonstrate that binocular non-stereoscopic cues can also be used to pass the Randot, by testing participants with the test rotated, a condition that abolishes stereopsis, and comparing the performance to a monocular viewing condition. We also assessed the Random Dot Butterfly test and discovered considerable amounts of non-stereoscopic cues, including binocular cues in the Circles that can be used to deceive the test. Participants with amblyopia had more difficulty using non-stereoscopic cues than neurotypical observers. We gathered normal-viewing Randot stereoacuities for 110 participants (90 neurotypical and 20 with amblyopia) and compared them to psychophysical stereoacuities (our gold standard). The Randot test showed low positive normalized predictive values for detecting stereoblindness. It could perfectly detect stereo-impairment but with a low sensitivity.