ArticleVision research2026
Effects of stimulus size and contrast on binocular rivalry in adults with anisometropic amblyopia.
Article in Vision research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Orientation-Specific Inhibitory Plasticity in Binocular Rivalry.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026Article
- Abnormal Binocular Rivalry Dynamics in Amblyopia: A Potential Diagnostic Marker.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The amblyopic eye, with reduced visual acuity, has limited ability to compete for perceptual dominance with the non-amblyopic fellow eye during binocular rivalry, likely due to diminished excitatory input or active central foveal suppression. This study investigated whether enhancing the visibility of the amblyopic eye, by increasing stimulus contrast or enlarging stimulus size, could help restore binocular rivalry in adults with anisometropic amblyopia. Using a standard binocular rivalry paradigm, we manipulated the contrast presented to the amblyopic eye and the size of rival stimuli. Results showed that the amblyopic eye exhibited little or no perceptual dominance at smaller stimulus sizes under an equal contrast condition, but dominance increased with larger stimulus sizes and increased contrast, while reducing fellow-eye dominance. However, overall perceptual dominance of the amblyopic eye remained substantially lower than that of the fellow eye and of normal-vision observers, even with enlarged stimuli or high contrast. We found no significant correlation between the fellow-eye dominance bias and the depth of amblyopia, stereoacuity, or interocular suppression in this cohort. Interestingly, individuals with amblyopia showed a much higher proportion of mixed perception compared to normal-vision observers, suggesting qualitatively altered interocular interactions in adults with anisometropic amblyopia. Nevertheless, these findings indicate that increasing the visibility of the amblyopic eye can partially restore its perceptual dominance, offering new insights into the mechanisms of suppression in amblyopia and suggesting potential directions for developing treatment strategies that target binocular vision.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.