Vergence-accommodation conflicts hinder visual performance and cause visual fatigue.

By David M. Hoffman, Ahna Reza Girshick, Kurt Akeley, M. Banks. Journal of Vision, 2008

1,687 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Three-dimensional (3D) displays have become important for many applications including vision research, operation of remote devices, medical imaging, surgical training, scientific visualization, virtual prototyping, and more. In many of these applications, it is important for the graphic image to create a faithful impression of the 3D structure of the portrayed object or scene. Unfortunately, 3D displays often yield distortions in perceived 3D structure compared with the percepts of the real scenes the displays depict. A likely cause of such distortions is the fact that computer displays present images on one surface. Thus, focus cues-accommodation and blur in the retinal image-specify the depth of the display rather than the depths in the depicted scene. Additionally, the uncoupling of vergence and accommodation required by 3D displays frequently reduces one's ability to fuse the binocular stimulus and causes discomfort and fatigue for the viewer. We have developed a novel 3D display that presents focus cues that are correct or nearly correct for the depicted scene. We used this display to evaluate the influence of focus cues on perceptual distortions, fusion failures, and fatigue. We show that when focus cues are correct or nearly correct, (1) the time required to identify a stereoscopic stimulus is reduced, (2) stereoacuity in a time-limited task is increased, (3) distortions in perceived depth are reduced, and (4) viewer fatigue and discomfort are reduced. We discuss the implications of this work for vision research and the design and use of displays.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Epidemiology, Media Technology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/69319a6ffa037e99beeb25c1ebb0da59947104a0

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Media Technology

Citations in the corpus

The zone of comfort: Predicting visual discomfort with stereo displays (2011, methodology): “For further details on this display technique, see Akeley, Watt, Girshick, and Banks (2004), Hoffman et al. (2008), and Love et al. (2009).”
Nonlinear disparity mapping for stereoscopic 3D (2010, background): “The fundamental problem lies in the complex interplay of human visual perception and the restrictions of display devices [Howard and Rogers 2002; Hoffman et al. 2008].”
State of the Art in Stereoscopic and Autostereoscopic Displays (2011, background): “Other research [ 5 ] indicates that the actual tolerable conditions for comfortable viewing could be less restricted than those given in [4] and [6].”
Stereoscopic 3D-TV: Visual Comfort (2011, background): “In the last two decades, this conﬂict has been the object of signiﬁcant interest and many researchers have provided empirical evidence regarding its mechanisms [12], [15], [16], [39], [46], [48]–[53].”
The perception of egocentric distances in virtual environments - A review (2013, methodology): “Further, there are results showing the inﬂuence of accommodative information on 3D shape perception with random dot stereograms [Hoffman et al. 2008; Watt et al. 2005].”
State of the art of virtual reality technology (2016, background): “Still persistent issues are for example the AccommodationVergence Conflict [71], [72].”
Three-Dimensional Displays: A Review and Applications Analysis (2011, background): “It should then be possible to support physical accommodation cues and Hoffman et al. [43] conclude that these are important in accurate depth reproduction at shorter viewing distances.”