PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 3798744

Different encoding mechanisms for phase and contrast.

Abstract

Phase sensitivity was assessed over a large range of exposure durations by means of a 2AFC staircase procedure where the observer had to detect the relative position of sinusoidal gratings relative to a superimposed thin, dark line. Phase discrimination thresholds decreased as a function of exposure duration although the contrast of the stimuli was weighted for equal detectability at all durations. Phase sensitivity improved markedly with contrast, as opposed to the degradation with contrast seen in contrast discrimination paradigms. The contrast and time functions of phase sensitivity both support the hypothesis that phase is processed separately from contrast by a pathway with different temporal and contrast characteristics. We propose a model where phase sensitivity depends on a luminance subtraction process with a time constant of about 130 msec.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C W Tyler, A Gorea. 1986. Different encoding mechanisms for phase and contrast.. https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(86)90042-8

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Motion deblurring in human vision.

Under normal viewing conditions we are little conscious of blur in moving objects, despite the persistence of vision. Moving objects look more blurred in brief than in long exposures, suggesting an active mechanism for suppressing motion blur. To see whether blur suppression would improve visual discrimination of objects, we measured blur discrimination thresholds for moving Gaussian-blurred edges and bars. The observer's task was to decide which of two moving stimuli, presented successively, was the more blurred. It is known that for stationary objects the just-noticeable difference in blur increases with baseline blur; therefore, if motion increases blur, it would be expected to increase the just-noticeable difference in blur. An active deblurring mechanism, on the other hand, would be expected to counteract the detrimental effects of motion blur on discrimination performance. We found, however, that motion increased thresholds for blur discrimination, both for brief (40 ms) and for longer (150 ms) exposures. We conclude that motion deblurring is a subjective effect, which does not enhance visual discrimination performance. Moving objects appear sharp, not because of some special mechanism that removes blur, but because the visual system is unable to perform the discrimination necessary to decide whether the moving object is really sharp or not.

Discrimination, Psychological

Anisotropy for direction discrimination in a two-frame apparent motion display.

Direction discrimination (upward/downward or left/right) for a Gabor patch in a two-frame motion display was measured as a function of the inter-frame displacement size of the component grating with the stimulus position (center, left, right, upper and lower visual fields) as a parameter. The results showed that, for vertical motion in the center, left, right and lower visual fields, the observers saw downward motion more frequently than upward motion, whereas for vertical motion in the upper field and for horizontal motion, no preference for one of the two opposite directions was obtained. Human motion vision is anisotropic in the lower half of the visual field.

Discrimination, Psychological

Classifying illusory contours: edges defined by "pacman" and monocular tokens.

Thresholds for the discrimination of orientation were measured in the human fovea for figures and borders delineated by solid lines and by "pacman" tokens as introduced by Kanizsa, as well as by contours induced by monocular tokens giving a stereoscopic depth illusion of a knife edge. Orientation discrimination of these illusory contours is poorer by a factor of approximately 2 than that of equivalent contours made of solid lines and is not much better than that for their supporting structures if taken alone. It is concluded that these kinds of illusory borders do not address the "border" or "edge" mechanism in the same way as real lines. Orientation discrimination and simultaneous orientation contrast (tilt illusion) were compared for a variety of illusory borders. The more robust the borders, i.e., the more sensitive to changes in orientation, the less their susceptibility to the tilt illusion.

Discrimination, Psychological