Fusion of Complex Flicker II

Levinson, John Z.

doi:10.1126/science.131.3411.1438

Cited by 32 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The headaches relationship is strongly age sensitive while the eyestrain relationship is not so strong, suggesting that many other factors also influence eyestrain. This need not conflict with Prof Hopkinson's findings that complaints came from women and from the [35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45] Fi,~. A..P~vpor~acr~ of office workers in each age group who suffer from eyestrain (N = 626).…”

supporting

confidence: 50%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Human sensitivity to flicker

Brundrett¹

1974

Lighting Research & Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The factors influencing flicker sensitivity are reviewed. Sensitivity is increasing because of improving lighting standards and personal peak sensitivity occurs for people approximately 20 years old. There is wide variability between people and the effect of flicker is related to the individual threshold. Office surveys reveal that significant numbers of people see flicker and that this feature is associated with the 'unsatisfactory' ratings of the lighting. Some headaches and eyestrain are related to seeing flicker. Light modulation from fluorescent lamps at 50 and 100 Hz has been measured and the growth in the 50 Hz component with time has been studied. The 50 Hz component is the one which is normally seen. The lamp characteristics show this 50 Hz modulation to remain at a low value for the first 7-8000 hours operation and thereafter to rise more rapidly with operation. Planned lamp replacement is now essential.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 50%

“…We took random samples from a large office population. Experience and expectation would influence whether or not a person would actually complain and this may well be the category of [35][36][37][38][39][40] year old women.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Human sensitivity to flicker

Brundrett¹

1974

Lighting Research & Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has long been considered that the attenuation in photopic temporal sensitivity at low temporal frequency due to luminance differences between the test and surround [40–43] is a property of the retina [41,60,61]. Eye movements, however, are unlikely to play a role because they enhance low-frequency sensitivity [61–63]. There may be multiple origins for the slower mesopic RTs and the increased variability observed on the dark surrounds.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of rod–cone interactions on mesopic visual performance mediated by chromatic and luminance pathways

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We studied the effect of rod–cone interactions on mesopic visual reaction time (RT). Rod and cone photoreceptor excitations were independently controlled using a four-primary photostimulator. It was observed that (1) lateral rod–cone interactions increase the cone-mediated RTs; (2) the rod–cone interactions are strongest when rod sensitivity is maximal in a dark surround, but weaker with increased rod activity in a light surround; and (3) the presence of a dark surround nonselectively increased the mean and variability of chromatic (+L−M, S-cone) and luminance (L + M + S) RTs independent of the level of rod activity. The results demonstrate that lateral rod–cone interactions must be considered when deriving mesopic luminous efficiency using RT.

show abstract

“…One well-known difference is that there are fewer temporal frequency channels than spatial ones. Most estimates suggest two, or possibly three, flicker mechanisms (Boynton & Foley, 1999;Hess & Snowden, 1992;Levinson, 1960;Mandler & Makous, 1984;Roufs, 1974;Watson, 1986). By contrast, there are likely to be many spatial frequency channels (Blakemore & Campbell, 1969;Campbell & Robson, 1968;Graham & Nachmias, 1971;Henning, 1988;Henning, Hertz, & Hinton, 1981).…”

Section: Off-frequency Looking Modelsmentioning

confidence: 96%

The effect of notched noise on flicker detection and discrimination

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flicker perception was investigated using two-alternative forced-choice detection and discrimination tasks with four different types of external noise: (1) broadband noise, (2) 5-Hz notched-noise--broadband noise with a 5-Hz band centered on the signal frequency removed, (3) 10-Hz notched-noise, and (4) no external noise. The signal was a burst of 10-Hz sinusoidal flicker presented in one of two observation intervals. In discrimination experiments, a pedestal--sinusoidal flicker with the same frequency, duration, and phase as the signal--was added to both observation intervals. With no noise, observers' performance first improved with increasing pedestal modulation, before deteriorating in accordance with Weber's Law, producing the typical "dipper" shaped plot of signal versus pedestal modulation. Noise affects performance, but the dipper effect persisted in each type of noise. The results exclude three models: the ideal-observer in which the pedestal improves performance by specifying the signal exactly; off-frequency-looking models in which the dipper depends on detection by channels tuned to temporal frequencies different from that of the signal; and strict energy detectors. Our data are consistent with signal processing by a single mechanism with an expansive non-linearity for near-threshold signal modulations (with an exponent of six) and a compressive "Weberian" non-linearity for high modulations.

show abstract

Fusion of Complex Flicker II

Cited by 32 publications

References 6 publications

Human sensitivity to flicker

Human sensitivity to flicker

Effect of rod–cone interactions on mesopic visual performance mediated by chromatic and luminance pathways

The effect of notched noise on flicker detection and discrimination

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About