文献（2010）

(1) Brooks,J.L. & Driver,J. 2010 Grouping puts figure–ground assignment in context by constraining propagation of edge assignment. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 2010, 72,  1053-1069.

(2) Cate,A.D. & Behrmann,M. 2010 Perceiving parts and shapes from concave surfaces. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 2010, 72, 153-167.

(3) Champion,R.A.& Warren,P.A., Ground-plane influences on size estimation in early visual processing. Vision Research 50,1510-1518.

(4) Di Luca,M., Domini,F. & Caudek,C. Inconsistency of perceived 3D shape. Vision Research 50,1519-1531.

(5) Edwards,M., O’Mahony,S., Ibbotson,M.R. & Kohlhagen,S. 2010 Vestibular stimulation affects optic-flow sensitivity. Perception,39, 1303–1310.

(6) Gantz,L. & Bedell,H.E. 2010 Transfer of perceptual learning of depth discrimination between local and global stereograms. Vision Research 50,1891-1899.

(7) Gardner,J., Austerweil,J.L. & Palmer,S.E. 2010 Vertical position as a cue to pictorial depth:Height in the picture plane versus distance to the horizon. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics,72,445-453.

(8) Gillam,G., Palmisano,S.A. & Govan,D.G. 2010 Depth interval estimates from motion parallax and binocular disparity beyond interaction space. Perception, 40, 39–49

(9) Gonzalez,E.G.,Allison,R.S., Ono,H. & Vinnikov.M. 2010 Cue conflict between disparity change and looming in the perception. of motion in depth. Vision Research,50, 136-143.

(10) Hemker,L. & Kavšek,M 2010 The relative contribution of relative height, linear perspective, and texture gradients to pictorial depth perception in 7-month-old infants. Perception, 39, 1476–1490.

(11) Ito,H. 2010 Depth perception through circular movements of dots. Perception, 39, 918–930.

(12) Kalar,D.J., Garrigan,P., Wickens,T.D., Hilger,J.D. & Kellman.P.J. 2011 A unified model of illusory and occluded contour interpolation. Vision Research 50, 284-299.

(13) Kihara,K.& Takeda,Y. 2010 Time course of the integration of spatial frequency-based information in natural scenes. Vision Research 50,2158-2162.

(14) Kogo,N. Gool,L.V. & Wagemans,J. 2010 Linking depth to lightness and anchoring within the differentiation–integration formalism. Vision Research 50,1486-1500.

(15) Libertus,K. & Needham,A. 2010 Teach to reach: The effects of active vs. passive reaching experiences on action and perception. Vision Research 50,2750-2757.

(16) Ling.s, Hubert-Wallander,B. & Blake,R. 2010 Detecting contrast changes in invisible patterns during binocular rivalry. Vision Research 50,2421-2429.

(17) Mamassian,P. & Montalembert,M.de. 2010 A simple model of the vertical–horizontal illusion. Vision Research 50, 956-962.

(18) Meijer, F.& van den Broek,E.L. 2010 Representing 3D virtual objects: Interaction between visuo-spatial ability and type of exploration. Vision Research 50,630-635.

(19) Ni,R., Chen,L. & Andersen,G.J. 2010 Visual constraints for the perception of quantitative depth from temporal interocular unmatched features. Vision Research 50,1571-1580.

(20) Norman,J.F., Burton, C.L. & Best,L.A. 2010  Modulatory effects of binocular disparity and aging upon the perception of speed. Vision Research 50, 65–71.

(21) O’Kane, L.M. & Hibbard, P.B. 2010 Contextual effects on perceived three-dimensional shape. Vision Research 50, 1095-1100.

(22) Pizlo,Z., Sawada,T., Li,Y., Kropatsch,W.G., Steinman,R.M. 2010 New approach to the perception of 3D shape based on veridicality, complexity, symmetry and volume. Vision Research 50, 1-11.

(23) Peng,Q. & Shi,B.E. 2010 The changing disparity energy model. Vision Research 50, 181-192.

(24) Reppa,I.,Fouginie,D. & Schmidt,W. 2010 How does attention spread across objects oriented in depth? Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 912-925.

(25) Rogers,B. & Gyani,A. 2010 Binocular disparities, motion parallax, and geometric perspective in Patrick Hughes’s ‘reverspectives’: Theoretical analysis and empirical findings. Perception, 39,330–348.

(26) Seno,T.,Ito,H., Sunaga,S. & Nakamura,S. 2010 Temporonasal motion projected on the nasal retina underlies expansion–contraction asymmetry in vection. Vision Research 50,1131-1139.

(27) Sousa,R., Brenner ,E. & Smeets,J.B.J. 2010 A new binocular cue for absolute distance: Disparity relative to the most distant structure. Vision Research 50,1786-1792.

(28) Straube,S.,Grimsen,C. & Fahle ,M. 2010 Electrophysiological correlates of figure–ground segregation directly reflect perceptual saliency. Vision Research 50, 509-521.

(29) Stuit,S.M.,Verstraten,F.A.J. & Paffen,C.L.E. Saliency in a suppressed image affects the spatial origin of perceptual alternations during binocular rivalry. Vision Research 50,1913-1921.

(30) Su,Y.R.,He,Z.J. & Ooi,T.L. 2010The magnitude and dynamics of interocular suppression affected by monocular boundary contour and conflicting local features. Vision Research 50,2037-2047.

(31)Tozawa J, 2010, "Role of a texture gradient in the perception of relative size" Perception, 39, 641–660.

(32) Van Doorn,G.H.,Richardson,B.L.,Wuillemin,D.B. & Symmons,M.A. 2010 Visual and haptic influence on perception of stimulus size. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 813-822.

(33) Vergeer,M & van Lier,R. 2010 Feature-based activation and suppression during binocular rivalry. Vision Research 50, 743-749.

(34) Xu,J.P., He,Z.J. & Ooi,T.L. 2010 Surface boundary contour strengthens image dominance in binocular competition. Vision Research 50, 155-170.