Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Depth Perception and Spatial Vision01:15

Depth Perception and Spatial Vision

2.6K
Depth perception is the ability to perceive objects three-dimensionally. It relies on two types of cues: binocular and monocular. Binocular cues depend on the combination of images from both eyes and how the eyes work together. Since the eyes are in slightly different positions, each eye captures a slightly different image. This disparity between images, known as binocular disparity, helps the brain interpret depth. When the brain compares these images, it determines the distance to an object.
2.6K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Inter-tissue relationships of gene expression in liver, muscle and adipose tissue of children with end-stage chronic liver disease.

Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition·2026
Same author

Brain-Computer Interfaces: The Dawn of a New Era in Disease Treatment.

Exploration (Beijing, China)·2026
Same author

Evaluation of Gd-EOB-DTPA MRI With Diffusion and Clinicopathologic Features for Predicting Microvascular Invasion in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Journal of computer assisted tomography·2026
Same author

A Deep-Red Emissive Cage-in-Rings Complex for Lysosome Imaging.

Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English)·2026
Same author

Supportive University Climate and AI Dependence Among Undergraduates: The Sequential Mediating Role of Academic Self-Efficacy and Self-Control.

Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same author

The heterogeneity of dopamine-mediated vasodilation in human intrarenal arteries.

Journal of advanced research·2026
Same journal

Longitudinal changes in vessel density and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness after acute primary angle closure.

BMC ophthalmology·2026
Same journal

Dual-decoder multi-task network with graph attention mechanism for OCT retinal layer and fluid segmentation.

BMC ophthalmology·2026
Same journal

Determinants of axial length growth in infantile persistent fetal vasculature following early lensectomy-vitrectomy: a retrospective cohort.

BMC ophthalmology·2026
Same journal

A case of severe macular displacement secondary to aggressive proliferative vitreoretinopathy.

BMC ophthalmology·2026
Same journal

Flanged scleral fixation: thermoplastic properties of suture materials and implications for flange geometry.

BMC ophthalmology·2026
Same journal

Construction of a prediction model for the early efficacy of 577-nm-SML in treating CSC based on Bayesian network.

BMC ophthalmology·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Mar 22, 2026

Assessing Binocular Central Visual Field and Binocular Eye Movements in a Dichoptic Viewing Condition
07:45

Assessing Binocular Central Visual Field and Binocular Eye Movements in a Dichoptic Viewing Condition

Published on: July 21, 2020

5.1K

Evaluating stereoacuity with 3D shutter glasses technology.

Huang Wu1, Han Jin2, Ying Sun3

  • 1Department of Optometry, Second Hospital of Jilin University, No. 218, Ziqiang Street, Nanguan District, Changchun, 130041, China. wuhuang@jlu.edu.cn.

BMC Ophthalmology
|April 27, 2016
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study found that 3D laptop technology effectively measures stereoacuity. Symbol shape, size, and disparity type did not significantly impact stereoacuity results.

Keywords:
Horizontal disparityShutter glassesStereopsis

More Related Videos

Measuring Sensitivity to Viewpoint Change with and without Stereoscopic Cues
08:04

Measuring Sensitivity to Viewpoint Change with and without Stereoscopic Cues

Published on: December 4, 2013

4.9K
Comparison of Three Clinical Stereoscopic Methods for Measuring Binocular Visual Function During Amblyopic Treatment in Unilateral Amblyopia
06:19

Comparison of Three Clinical Stereoscopic Methods for Measuring Binocular Visual Function During Amblyopic Treatment in Unilateral Amblyopia

Published on: September 27, 2024

624

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Mar 22, 2026

Assessing Binocular Central Visual Field and Binocular Eye Movements in a Dichoptic Viewing Condition
07:45

Assessing Binocular Central Visual Field and Binocular Eye Movements in a Dichoptic Viewing Condition

Published on: July 21, 2020

5.1K
Measuring Sensitivity to Viewpoint Change with and without Stereoscopic Cues
08:04

Measuring Sensitivity to Viewpoint Change with and without Stereoscopic Cues

Published on: December 4, 2013

4.9K
Comparison of Three Clinical Stereoscopic Methods for Measuring Binocular Visual Function During Amblyopic Treatment in Unilateral Amblyopia
06:19

Comparison of Three Clinical Stereoscopic Methods for Measuring Binocular Visual Function During Amblyopic Treatment in Unilateral Amblyopia

Published on: September 27, 2024

624

Area of Science:

  • Ophthalmology
  • Vision Science
  • Human-Computer Interaction

Background:

  • Stereoacuity assessment is crucial for evaluating 3D display technologies.
  • Traditional methods may not fully capture performance with modern 3D laptops and shutter glasses.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To determine stereoacuity thresholds using a 3D laptop with shutter glasses.
  • To evaluate the influence of test symbol characteristics (shape, size) and disparity types on stereoacuity measurements.

Main Methods:

  • Thirty participants with normal visual acuity were recruited.
  • Three symbols (tumbling E, C, □) in six sizes were presented with crossed/uncrossed disparities.
  • Two testing systems (fixed and variable distance) were employed to measure stereoacuity.

Main Results:

  • No significant differences in stereoacuity were found across different symbol shapes and sizes.
  • Varying disparity types (crossed/uncrossed) did not significantly affect stereoacuity outcomes.
  • Both fixed and variable distance testing systems yielded consistent, non-significant results for tested parameters.

Conclusions:

  • The 3D laptop system provides a convenient and effective method for stereoacuity evaluation.
  • Target shape, size, and disparity type do not significantly alter stereoacuity measurements with this technology.
  • Computer-assisted 3D measurements allow for flexible target selection based on specific application needs.