On the Capacity of Directionally Selective Mechanisms to Encode Different Dimensions of Moving Stimuli

Direction-specific losses of contrast sensitivity for sinusoidal test gratings as a function of the contrast of a sinusoidal adapting grating were found to be similar to those measured previously with square-wave gratings. Furthermore, both relationships were similar to that between motion aftereffect duration and the contrast of sinusoidal adapting gratings, and all three sets of data can be fit by a single function. The function shows that the magnitude of direction-specific adaptation effects increases linearly with the logarithm of adapting contrast in the low contrast region, but is essentially independent of contrast once the contrast exceeds threshold by more than a factor of five—six. In addition, it was found that direction-specific losses of contrast sensitivity are restricted to limited ranges of spatial frequency.

[1]  D. Tolhurst,et al.  The analysis of the drift rate of moving sinusoidal gratings. , 1973, Vision research.

[2]  R. Bogartz,et al.  A least squares method for fitting intercepting line segments to a set of data points. , 1968 .

[3]  A Pantle,et al.  A multistable movement display: evidence for two separate motion systems in human vision. , 1976, Science.

[4]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Line length detectors in the human visual system: evidence from selective adaptation. , 1972, Vision research.

[5]  A Pantle,et al.  A model for after-effects of seen movement. , 1967, Vision research.

[6]  J. Kulikowski,et al.  Apparent fineness of briefly presented gratings: balance between movement and pattern channels , 1975, Vision Research.

[7]  T. M. Nelson,et al.  Flicker adaptation shows evidence of many visual channels selectively sensitive to temporal frequency , 1975, Vision Research.

[8]  R. A. Smith.  Studies of temporal frequency adaptation in visual contrast sensitivity , 1971, The Journal of physiology.

[9]  D. Tolhurst,et al.  Psychophysical evidence for sustained and transient detectors in human vision , 1973, The Journal of physiology.

[10]  A Pantle,et al.  Size-Detecting Mechanisms in Human Vision , 1968, Science.

[11]  A Pantle,et al.  Flicker adaptation. I. Effect on visual sensitivity to temporal fluctuations of light intensity. , 1971, Vision research.

[12]  C. Enroth-Cugell,et al.  The contrast sensitivity of retinal ganglion cells of the cat , 1966, The Journal of physiology.

[13]  A. Pantle,et al.  Motion aftereffect as a function of the contrast of sinusoidal gratings , 1976, Vision Research.

[14]  R. Sekuler,et al.  Aftereffect of Seen Motion with a Stabilized Retinal Image , 1963, Science.

[15]  D. Tolhurst.  Separate channels for the analysis of the shape and the movement of a moving visual stimulus , 1973, The Journal of physiology.

[16]  N. Sutherland.  Figural After-Effects and Apparent Size , 1961 .

[17]  H. Barlow,et al.  Evidence for a Physiological Explanation of the Waterfall Phenomenon and Figural After-effects , 1963, Nature.

[18]  G. B. Wetherill,et al.  SEQUENTIAL ESTIMATION OF POINTS ON A PSYCHOMETRIC FUNCTION. , 1965, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[19]  R Sekuler,et al.  Contrast response of human visual mechanismsensitive to orientation and direction of motion. , 1969, Vision research.