Or kind of! This is quiet a technical paper but I think it shows a very coherent picture about what is actually happening: absolute disparities for depth cannot be accessed directly but need to be transformed into relative disparities or used for vergence movements. See the paper for more!

We found that the illusory tilt produced from Zöllner illusion influences the orientation disparities defining stereoscopic slant or rivalry. Thus, rivalry and stereopsis rely on the illusory rather than the displayed orientations.

• Chopin, A., Mamassian, P., & Blake, R. (2012). Stereopsis and rivalry are based on perceived rather than physical orientations. Vision Research, 63: 63-68. [Abstract] / [PDF]

• Chopin, A., Mamassian, P., & Blake, R.,  (2011). Transition between stereopsis and binocular rivalry is based on perceived, rather than physical, orientation [Abstract]. Journal of Vision,11(11): 301. doi: 10.1167/11.11.301 [Proceedings] / [Poster]

We uncovered that the current percept is strongly influenced by a group of stimuli remotely presented in the past. We explain it with a new theory according to which adaptation is predictive.

• Chopin, A., & Mamassian, P. (2012). Predictive properties of adaptation. Current Biology, 22(7): 622-626. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.021. [Abstract] / [PDF]
  
• Dispatch by Colin Clifford [Abstract] / [PDF]
• Chopin, A., Capps, M., & Mamassian, P. (2010). Expectation from temporal sequences influences binocular rivalry [Abstract]. Journal of Vision, 10(7): 347. [Proceedings] / [Poster]

In a very simple stereo configuration, we discovered that observers exhibit strong biases. When an upper dot is presented in front of a lower dot, the depth between the dots is perceived as completely different from the depth between an upper dot behind a lower dot. We have shown that the bias cannot be explained by cyclovergence biases or the tilt of the horopter.

• Harris, J., Chopin, A., Zeiner, K., & Hibbard, P. (2012). Perception of relative depth interval: systematic biases in perceived depth. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 65(1): 73-91. doi:10.1080/17470218.2011.589520. [Abstract] / [PDF]