Motion coherence detection as a function of luminance level in human central vision

Citation
Mjm. Lankheet et al., Motion coherence detection as a function of luminance level in human central vision, VISION RES, 40(26), 2000, pp. 3599-3611
Citations number
20
Categorie Soggetti
da verificare
Journal title
VISION RESEARCH
ISSN journal
00426989 → ACNP
Volume
40
Issue
26
Year of publication
2000
Pages
3599 - 3611
Database
ISI
SICI code
0042-6989(2000)40:26<3599:MCDAAF>2.0.ZU;2-C
Abstract
We studied the changes and invariances of foveal motion detection upon dark adaptation. It is well-documented that dark adaptation affects both spatia l and temporal aspects of visual processing. The question we were intereste d in is how this alters motion coherence detection for moving random textur e. To compare motion sensitivity at different adaptation levels, we adjuste d the viewing distance for equal detectability of a stationary pattern. At these viewing distances we then measured velocity tuning curves for moving random pixel arrays (RPAs). Mean luminance levels ranged from 50 down to 0. 005 ed m(-2). Our main conclusion is that foveal velocity tuning is amazing ly close to luminance-invariant, down to a level of 0.05 ed m(-2). Because different viewing distances, and hence, retinal image sizes were used, we p erformed two control experiments to assess variations of these two paramete rs separately. We examined the effects of retinal inhomogeneities using dis cs of different size and annuli filled with RPAs. Our conclusion is that th e central visual field, including the near periphery is still rather homoge neous for motion detection at 0.05 ed m(-2), but the fovea becomes unrespon sive at the lowest luminance level. Variations in viewing distance had mark ed effects on velocity tuning, both at the light adapted level and the 0.05 ed m(-2) level. The size and type of these changes indicated the effective ness of distance scaling, and show that deviations from perfect invariance of motion coherence detection were not due to inaccurate distance scaling. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.