Initial Stages of Dark and Light Adaptation*†

Baker, Howard D.

doi:10.1364/josa.53.000098

Cited by 128 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is remarkable that an increase in threshold is found regardless of the direction of mask luminance change (i.e., target sensitivity decreases regardless of whether the mask is an increase or decrease of luminance). Such effects on sensitivity have been described in earlier studies of threshold behavior at the onset and offset of an adapting background (Baker, 1963;Crawford, 1947).…”

Section: Target Thresholds In the Absence Of Maskssupporting

confidence: 53%

Backward and forward masking associated with saccadic eye movement

Brooks

Impelman

Lum

1981

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual masking effects on test flash thresholds were measured under real and simulated eye movement conditions to determine whether visual masking is primarily responsible for elevations in threshold that are sometimes associated with saccadic eye movements. Brief luminous flashes presented to the central retina before, during, and after saccades were masked by stimuli presented either pre-or postsaccadically. The amount and time course of masking were quantitatively dependent on stimulus parameters of intensity and temporal separation and were unaffected by eye movement parameters (amplitude, velocity, direction) as long as retinal stimulus conditions were constant. The duration of forward masking was longer than that of backward masking. When retinal conditions during saccades were mimicked while the eyes were held steady, masking interactions were identical to those obtained during real saccades. These results indicate that masking effects during saccades in ordinary environments are determined solely by the stimulus situation at the retina. Putative nonvisual, centrally originating saccadic suppression suggested by other authors is evidently not additive with visually determined masking during saccades.

show abstract

Section: Target Thresholds In the Absence Of Maskssupporting

confidence: 53%

Backward and forward masking associated with saccadic eye movement

Brooks

Impelman

Lum

1981

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In principle, our results are consistent with the results of Crawford [4], Baker [1], and Lingelbach et al [10]. Approximately 0.1 s before the adaptation step a threshold rise starts, which quickly becomes very steep.…”

Section: The Course Of the Subjective Threshold (Discrimination Thressupporting

confidence: 93%

The Dynamics of the Light Adaptation of the Human Visual System; Subjective and Electroretinographic Analysis

Thoss¹,

S²,

Bartsch³

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The excitation of the visual system increases with increasing retinal illumination. At the same time, the sensitivity of the system decreases (light adaptation). Higher excitation automatically results in a lower sensitivity. This study investigates whether this parallelism between the excitation and the sensitivity also applies in the dynamic case, that is, during the transition to a higher excitation level after an increase in the retinal illuminance.For this purpose, the courses of the subjective and the electroretinographic threshold during the transitional phase after a step of the adaptation illumination was determined by means of a special light-stimulation apparatus. As a measure of the course of the excitation during this time, the response ERG on the adaptation step was recorded with a special amplifier.The threshold curve always has an overswing, which shows subjectively very strong differences. It can be concluded that the glare caused by a sudden increase in illuminance is subjectively very different. The comparison between the response ERG on the adaptation step and the course of the electroretinographic increment threshold during this time shows a broad agreement between the two courses.It can thus be assumed that the sensitivity of the visual system follows the course of the excitation also in the dynamic case. In addition, the investigation shows that the glare experienced after a step in the illuminance clearly shows great subjective differences.

show abstract

“…In general, the rate of change in system output could be expected to decrease as the output level approaches the equilibrium level, which would ultimately be attained with sustained input-that is, as the difference between the current and equilibrium output level diminishes (Baker, 1963;Crawford, 1947). However, for the purpose of modeling the system, we will assume that the decrease in system output is linear for up to 100 msec following a change in stimulus luminance (the range of stimulus durations It is conceivable that dimmer stimuli would elicit this peak response with a longer latency and therefore produce longer persistence, offering an explanation for the inverse intensity effect (Coltheart, 1980).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The persistence of very brief displays and that of long-lasting displays are known to differ in their response to a range of stimulus parameters (Lovegrove, Martin, & Slaghuis, 1986), leading to speculation that the process or processes mediating persistence change as a function of stimulus duration (e.g., Bowling & Lovegrove, 1980). In addition, stimuli that are sustained during the relatively long-latency photochemical component of the visual on response (Baker, 1963) may be more effective than very brief stimuli at eliciting retinal afterimages. As noted by Breitmeyer (1984), afterimages produced by very highcontrast displays can generate a direct relationship between the duration of stimulus visibility and total luminous flux.…”

Section: Craig D Clark and John H Hogben The University Of Western mentioning

confidence: 99%

Visible persistence following a brief increment in stimulus luminance

Clark

Hogben

1991

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In previous studies, it has been demonstrated that visible persistence-the period for which the perceived duration of a stimulus exceeds its physical duration-can be extended by briefly incrementing the luminance of the stimulus immediately prior to offset. Using a two-component pattern integration task, we show that this effect is not an artifact of change in the total luminous flux within the stimulus. Visible persistence was unaffected by overall luminance of the stimulus. It was also time-locked to the luminance increment. Visible persistence is seen to result from a process that is initiated by stimulus onset and that can be either wholly or partially reinitiated by the onset ofthe luminance increment. The duration of this process (which determines the duration of stimulus visibility) can be modified in a graded fashion by stimulus events that occur after its initiation. We outline a single-process inhibitory feedback model of the persistence mechanism that accounts for the present findings.Visual displays presented for less than about 100 msec remain visible for some interval after the display has physically terminated (Efron, 1970a(Efron, , 1970b. The additional period of visibility is known as visible persistence (Coltheart, 1980). Visible persistence is characterized by stimulus dependencies that differentiate it from other well-studied visual aftereffects such as retinal afterimages (Coltheart, 1980; Di Lollo, Clark, & Hogben, 1988), and from well-known forms of short-term memory such as iconic memory (Coltheart, 1980). In particular, iconic memory and afterimages are known to increase in duration as the energy of the inducing stimulus is increased, by increments in either its luminance or its duration. By contrast, it is well established that the duration of visible persistence is inversely related to the duration of the stimulus (the inverse duration effect of Coltheart, 1980) and that visible persistence is usually inversely related to stimulus luminance (the inverse intensity effect).Various general accounts of the mechanism of visible persistence have been proposed. Di Lollo and Bourassa (1983) outlined two that they regarded as equally tenable. The first of these-the processing hypothesis-derives from the sensory-coding hypothesis put forward by Di Lollo (1980). In essence, this holds that persistence is a product of the activity of sensory-coding mechanisms that operate at the earliest stages of visual processing to recode the retinal image in terms of primitive features such as edges, bars, dots, and discontinuities. According to the processing hypothesis, the duration of the activity that a stimulus initiates in the persistence mechanism corresponds to the duration of very early stages in a chain of processing events triggered by a change in visual stimulation. Stimuli persist to the extent that this activity outlasts the corresponding physical stimulation.The second of the two accounts outlined by Di Lollo and Bourassa (1983) was proposed initially by Galifret (1977a, 1977b) and subsequen...

show abstract

Initial Stages of Dark and Light Adaptation*†

Cited by 128 publications

References 12 publications

Backward and forward masking associated with saccadic eye movement

Backward and forward masking associated with saccadic eye movement

The Dynamics of the Light Adaptation of the Human Visual System; Subjective and Electroretinographic Analysis

Visible persistence following a brief increment in stimulus luminance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About