1989
DOI: 10.1016/0042-6989(89)90091-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Peripheral positional acuity: Retinal and cortical constraints on 2-dot separation discrimination under photopic and scotopic conditions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
1
0

Year Published

1989
1989
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
1
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Six of the seven subjects were able to discriminate Gabors separated by 0.19 deg in eccentricity, and all seven subjects were able to discriminate differences of 0.77 deg eccentricity (lowest d′ was 1.2 for subject MC). The precision with which subjects judged Gabor locations is consistent with several previous studies on acuity in the periphery [11], [12], [13], even in absence of references [14]. Further, these psychophysical data confirm previous reports that the method of single stimuli can be used to measure acuity even though subjects must rely on an implicit standard when judging each stimulus [10], [15], [16].…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Six of the seven subjects were able to discriminate Gabors separated by 0.19 deg in eccentricity, and all seven subjects were able to discriminate differences of 0.77 deg eccentricity (lowest d′ was 1.2 for subject MC). The precision with which subjects judged Gabor locations is consistent with several previous studies on acuity in the periphery [11], [12], [13], even in absence of references [14]. Further, these psychophysical data confirm previous reports that the method of single stimuli can be used to measure acuity even though subjects must rely on an implicit standard when judging each stimulus [10], [15], [16].…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Rods comprise 95% of photoreceptors in the retina and 90% of photoreceptors in the macula (Curcio, Sloan, Kalina, & Hendrickson, 1990; Dubra et al, 2011), but we know very little about how spatial information is processed by rod-mediated pathways. The few studies that have investigated spatial vision under scotopic conditions (Duffy & Hubel, 2007; Livingstone & Hubel, 1994; Mandelbaum & Sloan, 1947; Yap, Levi, & Klein, 1989; Zele & Cao, 2014) reveal that rods signal the brain on the same or parallel pathways to cones, but that they have larger receptive fields and operate on a larger spatial scale. Some retinal ganglion cells may even adjust their receptive field tunings depending on light level (Yao et al, 2018).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%