advertisement
PURPOSE: It has been argued that the threshold for detecting frequency-doubling (FD) technology perimeter stimuli differs from the threshold for perceiving spatial structure (pattern) in the same targets. Thresholds for perceiving spatial structure have typically been assessed using orientation-identification experiments. The authors investigated the influence of orientation, edge profile, and psychophysical method on the origin of the reported differences in detection and orientation-identification thresholds for FD gratings. METHODS: Detection and orientation-identification thresholds were determined in 12 observers with the use of FD stimuli (0.25 cyc/deg, 25 Hz) presented centrally and at 15° eccentricity. Edge profile (square- and Gaussian-windowed) and orientation (horizontal, vertical, and oblique) were independently modified. Detection thresholds were also measured for spatially uniform flickering targets (25 Hz). Orientation-identification thresholds using a two-alternative forced choice (2-AFC) and a two-interval forced choice (2-IFC) method were also compared in five experienced observers. RESULTS: Orientation-identification and detection thresholds did not significantly differ under any condition tested. Orientation-identification thresholds obtained with 2-AFC were not significantly different from those obtained with 2-IFC. Thresholds for spatially uniform flicker were significantly lower than for FD stimuli. CONCLUSIONS: The authors found that orientation-identification and detection thresholds for FD gratings did not differ and argue that recent findings to the contrary arise from the inappropriate use of spatially uniform flicker targets as alternatives in 2-IFC experiments.
Dr. R.E. Hogg, Department of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
6.6.3 Special methods (e.g. color, contrast, SWAP etc.) (Part of: 6 Clinical examination methods > 6.6 Visual field examination and other visual function tests)