Literature DB >> 16213001

Contrast sensitivity for letter optotypes vs. gratings under conditions biased toward parvocellular and magnocellular pathways.

J Jason McAnany1, Kenneth R Alexander.   

Abstract

This study examined the extent to which letter optotypes and grating stimuli provide equivalent measures of contrast sensitivity under conditions designed to favor the magnocellular (MC) and parvocellular (PC) pathways. The contrast sensitivity functions (CSFs) of three visually normal observers were measured for Sloan letters and Gabor patches, using steady- and pulsed-pedestal paradigms to bias processing toward MC and PC pathways, respectively. CSFs for Gabor patches were low-pass for the steady-pedestal paradigm and band-pass for the pulsed-pedestal paradigm, in agreement with previous reports. However, CSFs for letters were low-pass for both testing paradigms. CSFs for letters restricted in frequency content by spatial filtering were equivalent to those for Gabor patches for both testing paradigms. Results indicate that conventional letter optotypes can provide a misleading measure of contrast sensitivity, especially under conditions emphasizing the PC pathway. The use of spatially band-pass filtered letters can provide a more appropriate evaluation of spatial contrast sensitivity while maintaining some of the potential advantages of letters.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16213001     DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2005.08.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vision Res        ISSN: 0042-6989            Impact factor:   1.886


  14 in total

1.  Using 10AFC to further improve the efficiency of the quick CSF method.

Authors:  Fang Hou; Luis Lesmes; Peter Bex; Michael Dorr; Zhong-Lin Lu
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.240

2.  Reduced Contrast Sensitivity is Associated With Elevated Equivalent Intrinsic Noise in Type 2 Diabetics Who Have Mild or No Retinopathy.

Authors:  J Jason McAnany; Jason C Park
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  M&S Smart System Contrast Sensitivity Measurements Compared With Standard Visual Function Measurements in Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Patients.

Authors:  Jessica L Liu; J Jason McAnany; Jacob T Wilensky; Ahmad A Aref; Thasarat S Vajaranant
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Spatial frequencies used in Landolt C orientation judgments: relation to inferred magnocellular and parvocellular pathways.

Authors:  J Jason McAnany; Kenneth R Alexander
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2008-04-18       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Temporal Frequency Abnormalities in Early-Stage Diabetic Retinopathy Assessed by Electroretinography.

Authors:  J Jason McAnany; Jason C Park
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 4.799

6.  Equivalent intrinsic noise, sampling efficiency, and contrast sensitivity in patients with retinitis pigmentosa.

Authors:  J Jason McAnany; Kenneth R Alexander; Mohamed A Genead; Gerald A Fishman
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2013-06-03       Impact factor: 4.799

7.  A hierarchical Bayesian approach to adaptive vision testing: A case study with the contrast sensitivity function.

Authors:  Hairong Gu; Woojae Kim; Fang Hou; Luis Andres Lesmes; Mark A Pitt; Zhong-Lin Lu; Jay I Myung
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 2.240

8.  Spatial-frequency dependent binocular imbalance in amblyopia.

Authors:  MiYoung Kwon; Emily Wiecek; Steven C Dakin; Peter J Bex
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-11-25       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Effect of luminance noise on the object frequencies mediating letter identification.

Authors:  Cierra Hall; Shu Wang; Reema Bhagat; J Jason McAnany
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-07-03

10.  Evaluating the performance of the quick CSF method in detecting contrast sensitivity function changes.

Authors:  Fang Hou; Luis Andres Lesmes; Woojae Kim; Hairong Gu; Mark A Pitt; Jay I Myung; Zhong-Lin Lu
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 2.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.