Biomedical subjects

Tim Ledgeway

Publications and source records attributed to Tim Ledgeway.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

The influences of visibility and anomalous integration processes on the perception of global spatial form versus motion in human amblyopia.

Do amblyopes demonstrate general irregularities in processes of global image integration? Or are these anomalies stimulus specific? To address these questions we employed directly analogous global-orientation and global-motion stimuli using a method that allows us to factor out any influence of the low-level visibility loss [Simmers, A. J., Ledgeway, T., Hess, R. F., & McGraw, P. V. (2003). Deficits to global motion processing in human amblyopia. Vision Research 43, pp. 729-738]. The combination of orientation and motion coherence thresholds reported here provides comparable psychophysical measures of global processing by spatial-sensitive and motion-sensitive mechanisms in the amblyopic visual system. The results show deficits in both global-orientation and global-motion processing in amblyopia, which appear independent of any low-level visibility loss, but with the most severe deficit affecting the extraction of global motion. This provides evidence for the existence of a dominant temporal processing deficit in amblyopia.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Poor encoding of position by contrast-defined motion.

Second-order (contrast-defined) motion stimuli lead to poor performance on a number of tasks, including discriminating form from motion and visual search. To investigate this deficiency, we tested the ability of human observers to monitor multiple regions for motion, to code the relative positions of shapes defined by motion, and to simultaneously encode motion direction and location. Performance with shapes from contrast-defined motion was compared with that obtained from luminance-defined (first-order) stimuli. When the position of coherent motion was uncertain, direction-discrimination thresholds were elevated similarly for both luminance-defined and contrast-defined motion, compared to when the stimulus location was known. The motion of both luminance- and contrast-defined structure can be monitored in multiple visual field locations. Only under conditions that greatly advantaged contrast-defined motion, were observers able to discriminate the positional offset of shapes defined by either type of motion. When shapes from contrast-defined and luminance-defined motion were presented under comparable conditions, the positional accuracy of contrast-defined motion was found to be poorer than its luminance-defined counterpart. These results may explain some, but possibly not all, of the deficits found previously with second-order motion.

Cognition↗

PubMed2004

Interaction between luminance gratings and disparity gratings.

It was shown from geometry and photographic measurement that the shading pattern for a sinusoidal corrugated surface of frequency f approximates to a luminance-defined grating of frequency f, 2f or f + 2f in specific relative phase. It was confirmed that a luminance grating modifies the appearance of a suprathreshold stereoscopic corrugated surface, suggesting an interaction between shading and binocular disparity. Disparity thresholds for detecting random-dot, disparity-defined gratings of spatial frequency 0.2 or 0.4 c/deg were measured in the presence of luminance gratings of spatial frequency 0.4 c/deg with the same orientation. Phase-specific facilitation of disparity thresholds was greatest for a phase relationship inconsistent with shading of a corrugated surface, and was disrupted by positional uncertainty. The presence of texture-defined lines (which served to mark explicitly the successive spatial locations of salient depth features in the image) produced a similar pattern of facilitation, in the absence of shape-from-shading cues. The pattern of results indicates direct local interactions, including spatial cueing, rather than interaction of depth cues.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Attentional modulation of threshold sensitivity to first-order motion and second-order motion patterns.

Previous studies [e.g. Vision Research 40 (2000) 173] have shown that when observers are required to selectively attend to one of two, spatially-adjacent patches containing either first-order (luminance-defined) or second-order (contrast-defined) motion, threshold sensitivity for identifying the direction of second-order motion, but not first-order motion, is enhanced for the attended stimuli. The processing of second-order motion, unlike first-order motion, may, therefore, require attention. However, other studies have found little evidence for differential effects of attention on the processing of first-order and second-order motion [Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science 42(4) (2001) 5061]. We investigated the effects of attention instructions on the ability of observers to identify the directions and spatial orientations of luminance-defined and contrast-defined motion stimuli. Pairs of motion stimuli were presented simultaneously and threshold performance was measured over a wide range of drift temporal frequencies and stimulus durations. We found: (1) direction discrimination thresholds for attended motion stimuli were lower than those for unattended stimuli for both types of motion. The magnitude of this effect was reduced when the observers were not given prior knowledge of which patch of motion (attended or unattended) they had to judge first. (2) Direction discrimination for first-order motion was similarly affected at all temporal frequencies and durations examined, but for second-order motion the effects of attention depended critically on the drift temporal frequency and stimulus duration used. (3) Orientation discrimination showed little or no influence of attention instructions. Thus, whether or not attention influences the processing of second-order motion depends crucially on the precise stimulus parameters tested. Furthermore under appropriate conditions the processing of first-order motion is also influenced by attention, albeit to a lesser extent than second-order motion.

Attention↗

PubMed2003

Deficits to global motion processing in human amblyopia.

We investigated global motion processing in a group of adult amblyopes using a method that allows us to factor out any influence of the known contrast sensitivity deficit. We show that there are independent global motion processing deficits in human amblyopia that are unrelated to the contrast sensitivity deficit, and that are more extensive for contrast-defined than for luminance-defined stimuli. We speculate that the site of these deficits must include the extra-striate cortex and in particular the dorsal pathway.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Rules for combining the outputs of local motion detectors to define simple contours.

We know something about the fidelity with which motion can be detected in local regions of the visual field but nothing about how these local motion signals are combined across space to define contours. To investigate such linking rules, we measured the detectability of motion-defined contours using an adaptation of the paradigm of Field, Hayes, and Hess (Vision Research, 33 (1993) 173) in which subjects are asked to detect the presence of simple contours defined solely by local motion direction that are embedded in a field of otherwise random local motions. We show that contours defined by motion whose direction is along the contour are more detectable than contours defined by motions of any common direction. Furthermore, the contour configuration is important in that straight and moderately curved contours, though not highly curved ones, can support this specialized form of motion integration.

Computer Graphics↗