Flashed stimulation produces strong simultaneous brightness and color contrast

Kaneko, Sae; Murakami, Ikuya

doi:10.1167/12.12.1

Cited by 22 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Unlike earlier studies of simultaneous contrast indicating that induction was a slow process with a cut-off frequency between 2.5 and 5 Hz (DeValois, Webster, DeValois & Lingelbach, 1986; Rossi & Paradiso, 1996), these studies found that brightness induction was strongest at short presentation durations and declined in magnitude with increasing duration. The shortest presentation interval was 58 ms in the Robinson and de Sa (2008) study and 10 ms in the investigation by Kaneko and Murakami (2012). These results are inconsistent with the idea that brightness induction depends on a slow filling-in process; however, as noted by Robinson and de Sa (2008) they do not rule out a fast filling-in mechanism (Komatsu, 2006).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 70%

“…The findings that the phase (time) lag of induction did not vary with test field height and that induction was present even at 24 Hz, argued against a slow filling-in explanation for brightness induction in grating induction stimuli. This conclusion has been further supported by investigations of induction magnitude in simultaneous contrast stimuli using very brief stimulus presentations (Robinson & de Sa, 2008; Kaneko & Murakami, 2012). Unlike earlier studies of simultaneous contrast indicating that induction was a slow process with a cut-off frequency between 2.5 and 5 Hz (DeValois, Webster, DeValois & Lingelbach, 1986; Rossi & Paradiso, 1996), these studies found that brightness induction was strongest at short presentation durations and declined in magnitude with increasing duration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 70%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Brightness induction magnitude declines with increasing distance from the inducing field edge

Blakeslee

McCourt

2013

Vision Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brightness induction refers to a class of visual illusions where the perceived intensity of a region of space is influenced by the luminance of surrounding regions. These illusions are significant because they provide insight into the neural organization and processing strategies employed by the visual system. The nature of these processing strategies, however, has long been debated. Here we investigate the spatial characteristics of grating induction as a function of the distance from the inducing field edge to evaluate the viability of various competing models. In particular multiscale spatial filtering models and homogeneous filling-in models make very different predictions in regard to the magnitude of induction as a function of this distance. Filling-in explanations predict that the brightness/lightness of the filled-in region will be homogeneous, whereas multiscale filtering predicts a fall-off in induction magnitude with distance from the inducing field edge. Induction magnitude was measured using a narrow probe version of the quadrature-phase motion-cancellation paradigm (Blakeslee & McCourt, 2011) and a point-by-point brightness matching paradigm (McCourt, 1994; Blakeslee & McCourt, 1997; 1999). Both techniques reveal a decrease in the magnitude of induction with increasing distance from the inducing edge. A homogeneous filling-in mechanism cannot explain the induced structure in the test fields of these stimuli. The results argue strongly against filling-in mechanisms as well as against any mechanism that posits that induction is homogeneous. The structure of the induction is, however, well accounted for by the multiscale filtering (ODOG) model of Blakeslee and McCourt (1999). These results support models of brightness/lightness, such as filtering models, which preserve these gradients of induction.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 70%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 70%

Brightness induction magnitude declines with increasing distance from the inducing field edge

Blakeslee

McCourt

2013

Vision Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To reduce the available color space to one-dimension, similarly to Kaneko and Murakami [23], we performed a previous experiment where subjects were able to Table 1: Summary of the experimental conditions (both spatial and temporal). In the spatial conditions, we detail the chromaticity sets in MacLeod and Boynton color space.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…stronger induction at low temporal frequencies, falling down beyond 2 − 3 Hz [34,39]. In flashed stimuli, the target stimulus is presented during a brief time (a 'blank' frame is usually shown when the target stimulus is not presented) [23]. Some of these studies measured the color induction of afterimages [1,24].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Color induction in equiluminant flashed stimuli

Cerda-Company¹,

Otazu²

2018

J. Opt. Soc. Am. A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Color induction is the influence of the surrounding color (inducer) on the perceived color of a central region. There are two different types of color induction: color contrast (the color of the central region shifts away from that of the inducer) and color assimilation (the color shifts towards the color of the inducer). Several studies on these effects used uniform and striped surrounds, reporting color contrast and color assimilation, respectively. Other authors (Kaneko and Murakami, J Vision, 2012) studied color induction using flashed uniform surrounds, reporting that the contrast was higher for shorter flash duration. Extending their work, we present new psychophysical results using both flashed and static (i.e., non-flashed) equiluminant stimuli for both striped and uniform surround. Similarly to them, for uniform surround stimuli we observed color contrast, but we did not obtain the maximum contrast for the shortest (10 ms) flashed stimuli, but for 40 ms. We only observed this maximum contrast for red, green and lime inducers, while for a purple inducer we obtained an asymptotic profile along flash duration. For striped stimuli, we observed color assimilation only for the static (infinite flash duration) red-green surround inducers (red 1st inducer, green 2nd inducer). For the other inducers' configurations, we observed color contrast or no induction. Since other works showed that non-equiluminant striped static stimuli induce color assimilation, our results also suggest that luminance differences could be a key factor to induce it.

show abstract

“…Considering that COCe processing at the early level is probably quite rapid (Blakeslee and McCourt, 2008), the visual system requires some additional mechanism to hold information about brightness estimation and information about contextual cues for the binding. The net COCe would be processed by co-operation of “rapid” and “slow” mechanisms as suggested in other brightness phenomena (Kaneko and Murakami, 2012; Cicchini and Spillmann, 2013). If this is the case, the size function becomes the sum of the temporally symmetric modulation function reflecting “rapid” processing and the temporally asymmetric function reflecting “slow” processing (Figure 10B).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

A temporal window for estimating surface brightness in the Craik-O'Brien-Cornsweet effect

Masuda¹,

Watanabe²,

Terao³

et al. 2014

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The central edge of an opposing pair of luminance gradients (COC edge) makes adjoining regions with identical luminance appear to be different. This brightness illusion, called the Craik-O'Brien-Cornsweet effect (COCe), can be explained by low-level spatial filtering mechanisms (Dakin and Bex, 2003). Also, the COCe is greatly reduced when the stimulus lacks a frame element surrounding the COC edge (Purves et al., 1999). This indicates that the COCe can be modulated by extra contextual cues that are related to ideas about lighting priors. In this study, we examined whether processing for contextual modulation could be independent of the main COCe processing mediated by the filtering mechanism. We displayed the COC edge and frame element at physically different times. Then, while varying the onset asynchrony between them and changing the luminance contrast of the frame element, we measured the size of the COCe. We found that the COCe was observed in the temporal range of around 600–800 ms centered at the 0 ms (from around −400 to 400 ms in stimulus onset asynchrony), which was much larger than the range of typical visual persistency. More importantly, this temporal range did not change significantly regardless of differences in the luminance contrast of the frame element (5–100%), in the durations of COC edge and/or the frame element (50 or 200 ms), in the display condition (interocular or binocular), and in the type of lines constituting the frame element (solid or illusory lines). Results suggest that the visual system can bind the COC edge and frame element with a temporal window of ~1 s to estimate surface brightness. Information from the basic filtering mechanism and information of contextual cue are separately processed and are linked afterwards.

show abstract

Flashed stimulation produces strong simultaneous brightness and color contrast

Cited by 22 publications

References 39 publications

Brightness induction magnitude declines with increasing distance from the inducing field edge

Brightness induction magnitude declines with increasing distance from the inducing field edge

Color induction in equiluminant flashed stimuli

A temporal window for estimating surface brightness in the Craik-O'Brien-Cornsweet effect

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About