Literature DB >> 680041

Differences in peripheral and foveal effects observed in stabilized vision.

H J Gerrits.   

Abstract

Foveal images fade much faster than peripheral images, at light-on as well as at light-off. An opposite result can be obtained, however, in case of unsatisfactory stabilization. The amount and extension of the brightness spreading before the fading depend on the stimulus brightness and its location on the retina. The intensity threshold and the maximal obtainable sharpness of the image decrease towards the periphery, the image becomes wider and sharper on increasing the stimulus intensity. In the foveal area brightness or darkness can be observed (even from stimuli below the foveal threshold) by a filling-in from the periphery, which has a lower threshold. On increasing the stimulus intensity very small pinpoints of light, tiny dots are observable in the foveal area. Each dot measures less than 1 min arc in diameter and is visible for a few hundred milliseconds only. The final sharply contoured foveal percept of a narrow line, observed at higher intensities, is made up of a crowding of these tiny dots. When lines wider than about 10 min arc are used as stimuli these small foveal dots are only seen along the inside contours but not on the (diffuse) interior of the line. In the periphery no tiny dots but only spots of larger size can be observed. At each location of the visual field the final percept seems to be built up from the co-operation of a number of perceptive elements of different sizes. Small elements fade faster, have higher thresholds, habituate more easily on repeated stimulation and become easier activated by small-amplitude stimulus displacements than larger elements. The results described, contradicting some literature date, depend heavily on the quality of the stabilization.

Mesh:

Year:  1978        PMID: 680041     DOI: 10.1007/BF00239729

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  19 in total

1.  SOME STUDIES OF PATTERN PERCEPTION USING A STABILIZED RETINAL IMAGE.

Authors:  C R EVANS
Journal:  Br J Psychol       Date:  1965-08

2.  Visual perception approached by the method of stabilized images.

Authors:  R M PRITCHARD; W HERON; D O HEBB
Journal:  Can J Psychol       Date:  1960-06

3.  The filling-in process.

Authors:  G L WALLS
Journal:  Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom       Date:  1954-07

4.  Microsaccades during finely guided visuomotor tasks.

Authors:  B J Winterson; H Collewijn
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1976       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  The effect of micromovements of the eye and exposure duration on contrast sensitivity.

Authors:  U Tulunay-Keesey; R M Jones
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1976       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  The influence of stimulus movements on perception in parafoveal stabilized vision.

Authors:  H J Gerrits; A J Vendrik
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1974-02       Impact factor: 1.886

7.  Foveal perceptive fields in the human visual system measured with simultaneous contrast in grids and bars.

Authors:  L Spillmann
Journal:  Pflugers Arch       Date:  1971       Impact factor: 3.657

8.  Stabilized images: increment thresholds and subjective brightness.

Authors:  J M Sparrock
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am       Date:  1969-07

9.  Contrast thresholds measured with stabilized and nonstabilized sine-wave graftings.

Authors:  D S Gilbert; D H Fender
Journal:  Opt Acta (Lond)       Date:  1969 Mar-Apr

10.  Voluntary control of microsaccades during maintained monocular fixation.

Authors:  R M Steinman; R J Cunitz; G T Timberlake; M Herman
Journal:  Science       Date:  1967-03-24       Impact factor: 47.728

View more
  4 in total

1.  Afterimages: a collective term for percepts of different origin.

Authors:  H J Gerrits; L J van Erning; E G Eijkman
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Apparent movements induced by stroboscopic illumination of stabilized images.

Authors:  H J Gerrits
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1979-02-15       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Suboptimal eye movements for seeing fine details.

Authors:  Mehmet N Agaoglu; Christy K Sheehy; Pavan Tiruveedhula; Austin Roorda; Susana T L Chung
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  Seeing via Miniature Eye Movements: A Dynamic Hypothesis for Vision.

Authors:  Ehud Ahissar; Amos Arieli
Journal:  Front Comput Neurosci       Date:  2012-11-08       Impact factor: 2.380

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.