Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 2338598

Task-dependent color discrimination.

Abstract

When an observer's ability to discriminate colored objects is estimated from the variability in color matches, the observer inspects adjacent visual fields carefully and makes considered judgments. Color discrimination does not always take place under such viewing conditions. When color video displays are used in time-critical applications (e.g., head-up displays, video control panels), the observer must discriminate among briefly presented targets seen within a complex spatial scene. We compare color-discrimination thresholds by using two tasks. In one task the observer makes color matches between two halves of a continuously displayed bipartite field. In a second task the observer detects a color target in a set of briefly presented objects. The data from both tasks are well summarized by ellipsoidal isosensitivity contours. The fitted ellipsoids differ both in their size, which indicates an absolute sensitivity difference, and orientation, which indicates a relative sensitivity difference.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A B Poirson, B A Wandell. 1990. Task-dependent color discrimination.. https://doi.org/10.1364/josaa.7.000776

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Terminology and nomenclature for standardization in quantitative fluorescence cytometry.

Terminology in any field is a complex mix of established conventions, accepted usages, disputed terms, and occasional misnomers. The terminology that has evolved for quantitative fluorescence cytometry (QFCM) is especially multifarious, in part because QFCM encompasses a range from subjective visual assessments to objective photon counts. Thus, while descriptive terms such as "dim" and "bright" are still quite useful, quantitative terms such as "binding capacity" should be used with collective understanding of their exact meanings. This article reviews current usage and proposes definitions that, with refinement from suppliers and users of QFCM technology, can provide the required clarity.

Calibration

Standardizing flow cytometry: a classification system of fluorescence standards used for flow cytometry.

The growing number of standards commercially available in the field of flow cytometry makes it difficult to know which standards to use to obtain a desired level of quality assurance. A classification system of fluorescence standards has been developed on the basis of their physical characteristics. In turn, these physical characteristics determine the ability of the specific standards to perform selected functions, such as alignment, target referencing, compensation, and calibration. Knowing the properties and limitations of specific standards will help flow cytometer users to select the appropriate standard for the application that they will be performing, especially in regard to intra- and interlaboratory quality assurance. Common protocols used in conjunction with specific classifications of reference standards can provide unified analysis regions or window of analysis across different instruments and/or laboratories. In addition, specific classifications of calibration standards can help select those standards that will provide independent and direct comparison of instrument performance parameters, especially in studies involving multiple laboratories. Knowledge and understanding of the classification system can guide flow cytometer users in more efficient and accurate instrument setup and quality control when conducting research, as well as clinical applications.

Calibration

Multi-platform, multi-site instrumentation and reagent standardization.

As flow cytometry laboratories involve themselves in more multi-site domestic and international clinical trial and research studies, it becomes imperative that they develop and adopt qualitative and quantitative standardization. This standardization does not need to be at the instrument-design level but it may evolve from a general consensus on instrument setup, internationally accepted standardized procedures, and quantitative fluorescence intensity units. Instrument condition, age, and setup as well as model and manufacturer all affect the overall instrument performance and quantitative characteristics. Therefore, when working with multiple instruments, platforms, or sites, a standard window of analysis is essential. Furthermore, we should strive to characterize instrument performance and quantitative indices so that data can be compared directly. The same thoughts and ideals hold true for standardizing procedures and reagents. Clones, conjugation, incubation times, pH, temperature, and other environmental conditions all combine to affect the qualitative and quantitative cellular indices that we are attempting to measure. Data are presented that illustrates why standardization is needed and how we have attempted to achieve it in our laboratories.

Calibration