Prolonged oscillation of the eyes induced by conflicting position input

Aftereffects of sustained convergence: some implications of the eye muscle potentiation hypothesis

Aftereffects of sustained convergence are generally explained as the result of eye muscle potentiation (EMP). Three implications of this hypothesis for aftereffects in distance perception were tested: (i) According to the EMP hypothesis the aftereffects are based on oculomotor distance cues only. The addition of secondary cues during the test period should therefore reduce or eliminate the aftereffects. This expectation was confirmed. (ii) According to the EMP hypothesis the critical variable determining the aftereffect should be the distance of the inspection stimulus from the observer but not from the test stimulus. In confirmation of the expectation the aftereffects of certain inspection stimuli were of the same direction for test stimuli which bounded the range of inspection distances on both sides. (iii) When the aftereffects are based on oculomotor distance cues only, the effect of secondary cues during the test period should remain unchanged when they are present during the inspection period as well. Contrary to this expectation the aftereffects did not depend on the cues available during the test. This suggests that they are based on secondary cues, too, provided they are present during the inspection period.

Disturbance of the oculomotor system due to lateral fixation

Three experiments are reported on the effects of previous lateral deviation of the eyes. There is a large effect on their subsequent resting position, and a smaller instantaneous effect on voluntary eye centring. Both are in the direction of previous fixation. The latter effect becomes insignificant within 30 s. The treatment produces errors in visually guided reaching away from the previous direction of fixation. The effects are consistent with a change in registered eye position, an effect also produced by exposure to prisms. Despite this similarity, the disturbance to the oculomotor system caused by these two treatments is sharply differentiated by the resting position. Prisms cause subsequent low frequency, high amplitude oscillations of the eyes (Craske and Templeton, 1968), whereas following lateral deviation the mean resting position returns gradually towards the pre-treatment position.

Speculations on a model of prism adaptation

Arguments and evidence are presented that prism adaptation results in a third end state in addition to the ‘traditional’ components of ‘proprioceptive shift’ and ‘visual shift’. That is, under certain conditions (most importantly, ones involving error-corrective feedback), exposure to prism-displaced vision induces a motor-learning component, referred to here as an ‘assimilated corrective response’. Thus the postexposure error in target pointing, the ‘negative aftereffect’, is postulated to be the algebraic sum of proprioceptive shift, visual shift, and an assimilated corrective response—at least in certain situations. Support for the existence of this third component as a form of learning is seen in the fact that it occurs primarily when prism exposure involves target-pointing experience, and that it is apparently subject to the effects of some ‘learning variables’.