PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10195390

Factors limiting peripheral pattern discrimination.

Abstract

Previous reports indicate that some foveally discriminable compound gratings are indiscriminable in peripheral vision, even when they are scaled by the ratio of peripheral to foveal grating acuity. To determine the stimulus properties that limit peripheral discrimination, we used Gaussian derivatives of various orders. These patterns are spatially localized and have intrinsic even or odd symmetry. Our results show that certain odd symmetric patterns are discriminable in the periphery, while others are not. Furthermore, certain even symmetric patterns are not peripherally discriminable. These data are consistent with three limitations on peripheral pattern discrimination: (1) Patterns that produce different maximum neural responses will be peripherally discriminable. (2) Positional uncertainty and undersampling degrade discrimination of high spatial frequency patterns in the periphery. (3) Patterns generating substantial neural activity within a constrained region are processed as textures in peripheral vision so that pattern details within that region are no longer available for discrimination. A neural model incorporating inhibition of simple cells by complex cells implements a transition between contour analysis and texture analysis in peripheral vision and explains the experimental data.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

H S Orbach, H R Wilson. 1999. Factors limiting peripheral pattern discrimination.. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856899x00058

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Relative localization in the human fovea: radial-tangential anisotropy.

A distinction is drawn between two intrinsic directions within a simple spatial configuration. The line joining two elements is the radial direction and orthogonal to it is the tangential direction. Separation and bisection discrimination and just-detectable differences in line length are examples of radial thresholds. Vernier and alignment detection are tangential thresholds. Neural processing along these two intrinsic directions differs. There is a strong 'oblique effect' for tangential thresholds and virtually none for radial thresholds. Flank interaction impairs tangential but not radial thresholds.

Fovea Centralis↗

Effect of localized defocus on detection thresholds for different sized targets in the fovea and periphery.

PURPOSE: Previous studies of optical blur in perimetry have measured the effect of foveal refractive error on peripheral perimetric detection thresholds. Since peripheral refractive error can be significantly different from that of the fovea we wished to remove the ambiguity of previous results by correcting the actual peripheral refractive error first before adding blur. METHODS: We measured detection thresholds in the fovea and at 30 degrees in the horizontal temporal field in two trained observers. Peripheral refractive error was determined at each location and thresholds measured at the same locations for stimuli ranging in size from 0.2 to 6.4 degrees and refractive errors between +/-4.00 diopters. RESULTS: Foveal thresholds increased immediately with increasing refractive error, particularly for smaller stimulus sizes. At 30 degrees, thresholds for smaller stimuli were less affected by defocus initially and then increased more sharply. Larger stimuli were relatively unaffected by defocus such that when stimulus size reached 1.6 degrees there was little or no increase in threshold for refractive error between +/-4.00 diopters. CONCLUSIONS: Peripheral refractive error, largely forgotten by perimetrists, has a significant effect on performance, particularly for smaller stimuli. Differences in foveal vs peripheral viewing can be explained by differences in ganglion cell receptive field sizes.

Fovea Centralis↗

Papillofoveal traction in macular hole formation: the role of optical coherence tomography.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the validity of the assumption that optical coherence tomographic scans of macular holes have a discrete linear signal (DLS) that represents a detached posterior vitreous face, and to analyze the DLS in macular hole pathogenesis. METHODS: Optical coherence tomographic scans were taken of 3 situations in which the vitreous conditions were known: (1) dissected intact vitreous, (2) clinically evident Weiss rings, and (3) maculae before and after saccades in eyes without a biomicroscopic posterior vitreous detachment. In addition, 70 eyes of 35 patients with macular holes underwent clinical examination and optical coherence tomographic scanning that passed through the optic disc and the fovea or macular hole. RESULTS: Spatial properties of the DLS matched those of the posterior vitreous face in the situations examined. Of the 70 eyes, 16 (23%) had a biomicroscopic posterior vitreous detachment, whereas a DLS was demonstrated in 40 (57%). Of the 54 eyes without a biomicroscopic posterior vitreous detachment, 18 (33%) had a DLS attached focally to the optic disc margin and the fovea or macular hole. All 7 of the "can opener" holes examined had a nasally "hinged" central flap, 6 with a focally attached DLS. CONCLUSIONS: The DLS corresponds to the posterior vitreous face. Anteronasal papillofoveal traction may generate some macular holes.

Fovea Centralis↗