Anisotropy for spatial summation of elongated patches of grating: A tale of two tails

Studies of spatial summation often use sinusoidal gratings with blurred edges. When the envelope is elongated (i) along the grating stripes and (ii) at right angles to the grating stripes, we refer to the stimuli as skunk-tails and tiger-tails respectively. Previous work [Polat & Tyler, 1999; Vision Research, 39, 887-895.] has found that sensitivity to skunk-tails is greater than for tiger-tails, but there have been several failures to replicate this result within a subset of the conditions. To address this we measured detection thresholds for skunk-tails, tiger-tails and squares of grating with sides matched to the lengths of the tails. For foveal viewing, we found a contrast sensitivity advantage in the order of 2dB for skunk-tails over tiger-tails, but only for horizontal gratings. For vertical gratings, sensitivity was very similar for both tail-types. When the stimuli were presented parafoveally (upper right visual field), a small advantage was found for skunk-tails over tiger-tails at both orientations, and spatial summation slopes were close to that of the ideal observer. We did not replicate the findings of Polat & Tyler, but our results are consistent with (i) those of Foley et al. [Foley, J. M., Varadharajan, S., Koh, C. C., & Farias, C. Q. (2007) Vision Research, 47, 85-107.] who used only vertical gratings and (ii) those from modelfest, where only horizontal gratings were used. The small effect of tail-type here suggests an anisotropy in the underlying physiology.

[1]  A. Watson,et al.  A standard model for foveal detection of spatial contrast. , 2005, Journal of vision.

[2]  Vision Research , 1961, Nature.

[3]  David J. Field,et al.  Contour integration by the human visual system: Evidence for a local “association field” , 1993, Vision Research.

[4]  Mylène C. Q. Farias,et al.  Detection of Gabor patterns of different sizes, shapes, phases and eccentricities , 2007, Vision Research.

[5]  R. Hess,et al.  Size matters, but not for everyone: individual differences for contrast discrimination. , 2005, Journal of vision.

[6]  T. Meese,et al.  Contextual modulation involves suppression and facilitation from the center and the surround. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[7]  C W Tyler,et al.  Mechanisms for dynamic stereomotion respond selectively to horizontal velocity components , 1995, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[8]  D. Kersten.  Spatial summation in visual noise , 1984, Vision Research.

[9]  Jyrki Rovamo,et al.  Modelling the dependence of contrast sensitivity on grating area and spatial frequency , 1993, Vision Research.

[10]  M. Mayer,et al.  Invariance of the slope of the psychometric function with spatial summation. , 1986, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[11]  M. Morgan,et al.  Perceived diagonals in grids and lattices , 1989, Vision Research.

[12]  C. Tyler,et al.  Lateral sensitivity modulation explains the flanker effect in contrast discrimination , 2001, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[13]  Jian Yang,et al.  Simulating Visual Pattern Detection and Brightness Perception Based on Implicit Masking , 2007, EURASIP J. Adv. Signal Process..

[14]  C. Tyler,et al.  Evidence for elongated receptive field structure for mechanisms subserving stereopsis , 2006, Vision Research.

[15]  R. Hess,et al.  The functional area for summation to threshold for sinusoidal gratings , 1978, Vision Research.

[16]  S. Klein,et al.  Facilitation of contrast detection by cross-oriented surround stimuli and its psychophysical mechanisms. , 2002, Journal of vision.

[17]  Yasunari Yokota,et al.  Facilitation of perceptual filling-in for spatio-temporal frequency of dynamic textures , 2005 .

[18]  C. Tyler,et al.  Signal detection theory in the 2AFC paradigm: attention, channel uncertainty and probability summation , 2000, Vision Research.

[19]  B Moulden,et al.  Collator units: second-stage orientational filters. , 1994, Ciba Foundation symposium.

[20]  S Baldassi,et al.  Are there separate first-order and second-order mechanisms for orientation discrimination? , 2000, Vision Research.

[21]  W. Simpson,et al.  Spatial summation of peripheral Gabor patches. , 2001, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[22]  I. Ohzawa,et al.  Length and width tuning of neurons in the cat's primary visual cortex. , 1994, Journal of neurophysiology.

[23]  R. Hess,et al.  The accessibility of spatial channels for stereo and motion , 2006, Vision Research.

[24]  U. Polat,et al.  What pattern the eye sees best , 1999, Vision Research.

[25]  Miguel P. Eckstein,et al.  Development of an image/threshold database for designing and testing human vision models , 1999, Electronic Imaging.

[26]  J. Rovamo,et al.  Modelling contrast sensitivity as a function of retinal illuminance and grating area , 1994, Vision Research.

[27]  J. Daugman.  Spatial visual channels in the fourier plane , 1984, Vision Research.

[28]  D G Pelli,et al.  Uncertainty explains many aspects of visual contrast detection and discrimination. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[29]  Anthony M. Norcia,et al.  Modelfest: year one results and plans for future years , 2000, Electronic Imaging.

[30]  H. Wilson,et al.  Detection of global structure in Glass patterns: implications for form vision , 1998, Vision Research.

[31]  T. Wiesel,et al.  Intrinsic connectivity and receptive field properties in visual cortex , 1985, Vision Research.

[32]  T. Meese,et al.  Probability summation for multiple patches of luminance modulation , 2000, Vision Research.

[33]  The 'uncurved lines' on Helmholtz's 'celestial sphere' , 2007 .

[34]  J. Gaddum.  Probit Analysis , 1948, Nature.

[35]  N. Graham.  Visual Pattern Analyzers , 1989 .

[36]  J. Robson,et al.  Probability summation and regional variation in contrast sensitivity across the visual field , 1981, Vision Research.

[37]  J. M. Foley,et al.  Human luminance pattern-vision mechanisms: masking experiments require a new model. , 1994, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[38]  A. Watson.  Summation of grating patches indicates many types of detector at one retinal location , 1982, Vision Research.

[39]  R. F. Hess,et al.  The contrast sensitivity gradient across the human visual field: With emphasis on the low spatial frequency range , 1989, Vision Research.

[40]  D. Pollen,et al.  Spatial receptive field organization of macaque V4 neurons. , 2002, Cerebral cortex.