Literature DB >> 32474213

Visual discomfort from flicker: Effects of mean light level and contrast.

Sanae Yoshimoto1, Fang Jiang2, Tatsuto Takeuchi3, Arnold J Wilkins4, Michael A Webster2.   

Abstract

Uncomfortable images generally have a particular spatial structure, which deviates from a reciprocal relationship between amplitude and spatial frequency (f) in the Fourier domain (1/f). Although flickering patterns with similar temporal structure also appear uncomfortable, the discomfort is affected by not only the amplitude spectrum but also the phase spectrum. Here we examined how discomfort from flicker with differing temporal profiles also varies as a function of the mean light level and luminance contrast of the stimulus. Participants were asked to rate discomfort for a 17° flickering uniform field at different light levels from scotopic to photopic. The flicker waveform was varied with a square wave or random phase spectrum and filtered by modulating the slope of the amplitude spectrum relative to 1/f. At photopic levels, the 1/f square wave flicker appeared most comfortable, whereas the discomfort from the random flicker increased monotonically as the slope of the amplitude spectrum decreased. This special status for the 1/f square wave condition was limited to photopic light levels. At the lower mesopic or scotopic levels, the effect of phase spectrum on the discomfort was diminished, with both phase spectra showing a monotonic change with the slope of the amplitude spectrum. We show that these changes cannot be accounted for by changes in the effective luminance contrast of the stimuli or by the responses from a linear model based on the temporal impulse responses under different light levels. However, discomfort from flicker is robustly correlated with judgments of the perceived naturalness of flicker across different contrasts and mean luminance levels.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  1/f amplitude spectrum; Contrast; Flicker; Retinal illuminance; Visual discomfort

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32474213      PMCID: PMC7311306          DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2020.05.002

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


  66 in total

1.  Generalized eta and omega squared statistics: measures of effect size for some common research designs.

Authors:  Stephen Olejnik; James Algina
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2003-12

2.  BOLD fMRI and psychophysical measurements of contrast response to broadband images.

Authors:  Cheryl A Olman; Kamil Ugurbil; Paul Schrater; Daniel Kersten
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Recommended effect size statistics for repeated measures designs.

Authors:  Roger Bakeman
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2005-08

4.  Visual motion mechanisms under low retinal illuminance revealed by motion reversal.

Authors:  Tatsuto Takeuchi; Karen K De Valois
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2009-02-27       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Motion processing at low light levels: Differential effects on the perception of specific motion types.

Authors:  Jutta Billino; Frank Bremmer; Karl R Gegenfurtner
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2008-03-18       Impact factor: 2.240

6.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

7.  Visual discomfort and flicker.

Authors:  Sanae Yoshimoto; Jesel Garcia; Fang Jiang; Arnold J Wilkins; Tatsuto Takeuchi; Michael A Webster
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2017-07-21       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Visual discomfort and blur.

Authors:  Louise O'Hare; Paul B Hibbard
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 2.240

9.  Relations between the statistics of natural images and the response properties of cortical cells.

Authors:  D J Field
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A       Date:  1987-12       Impact factor: 2.129

10.  Mesopic luminous-efficiency functions.

Authors:  M Ikeda; H Shimozono
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am       Date:  1981-03
View more
  1 in total

1.  Individual pupil size changes as a robust indicator of cognitive familiarity differences.

Authors:  Léon Franzen; Amanda Cabugao; Bianca Grohmann; Karine Elalouf; Aaron P Johnson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-21       Impact factor: 3.240

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.