Criterion-free pattern and flicker thresholds.

C A Burbeck

doi:10.1364/josa.71.001343

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 7334429

Criterion-free pattern and flicker thresholds.

C A Burbeck

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Previous measurements of pattern and flicker thresholds in man have used the psychophysical method of adjustment and have required that the subject change criteria. Our new approach measures pattern and flicker thresholds by a criterion-free procedure that requires that the subject distinguish a test stimulus from control stimuli that differ from the test in only one dimension, the spatial dimension in the pattern experiments and the temporal dimension in the flicker experiments. By using this technique, we find that the subject's pattern sensitivity is equal to or greater than his flicker sensitivity for all flickering gratings except those that have extremely low spatial and moderate or high temporal frequencies (depending on the subjects). Furthermore, spatiotemporal interaction is evident in both the pattern and the flicker data. These results differ substantially from those obtained by the method of adjustment.

Explore related subjects

Flicker Fusion Form Perception Humans Pattern Recognition, Visual Sensory Thresholds Vision, Ocular Journal Article Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

C A Burbeck. 1981. Criterion-free pattern and flicker thresholds.. https://doi.org/10.1364/josa.71.001343

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1995

The spatiotemporal range of inhibitory interaction in flicker detection.

The flicker thresholds of luminous bars were measured as a function of the spatial and/or temporal separation of two flickering stimuli. Each of the bars had an intensity profile of one-half cycle of a sinusoidal wave subtending 2.26 x 0.45 arc deg and each bar was presented twice at two positions with a duration of 10 msec. The spatial separation was defined as the distance between the adjacent flanks of two flickering stimuli, while the temporal separation was determined as the time-lag between the offset of the first flickering stimulus and the onset of the second. We found that the thresholds increased asymptotically with the spatial separation in such a way as to suggest that the spatial extent over which inhibitory interaction could be effective was as large as about 2 arc deg. We also found that the threshold gradually decreased with greater temporal separation; this indicated that the temporal proximity of successive stimuli effects less suppression on the temporal response. These two effects were seemingly additive. These findings suggest that the visual system involves not only local spatial interaction, but also a global mechanism capable of spreading inhibition over several local units after a delay of several msec.

Flicker Fusion↗

PubMed1993

Eccentricity and the Ferry-Porter law.

Is the flicker limit governed by the Ferry-Porter law or by some other law? We previously obtained strong evidence for the wide applicability of the Ferry-Porter law and for its variation with eccentricity [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 7, 743 (1990)]. Raninen and others [Vision Res. 28, 785 (1988); 31, 1875 1875 (1991)] have questioned our analysis of the data and our conclusions. We show that their criticism of the Ferry-Porter law is based on specious analyses and that their own data support the Ferry-Porter formulation. We also provide further evidence that the slope of the Ferry-Porter function increases markedly with eccentricity, implying that the inherent temporal properties of the retina grow more rapid with distance from the fovea.

Flicker Fusion↗

PubMed1992

Counterphase dichoptic flicker is seen as its own second harmonic.

If a patternless field is modulated sinusoidally in time so that the luminance change in one eye is in counterphase to that in the other, the resulting flicker appears faster than if the modulation to both eyes has the same phase. If observers set the frequency and the amplitude of a comparison in-phase field so that it matches a neighbouring counterphase field, modulated at, say, 2.5 x its threshold, they set the frequency to twice the counterphase frequency, and the amplitude to a value that is, for a given frequency, a constant ratio of the modulation of the counterphase field. Counterphase stimulation thus appears to cause an internal second-harmonic signal. However, it is not possible to cancel this by adding a second harmonic component to the stimulus.

Flicker Fusion↗