Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 6512617

Spatial-frequency difference thresholds for central and peripheral viewing.

Abstract

We measured spatial-frequency difference thresholds with a two-alternative forced-choice technique. On each trial a given standard frequency was presented in one temporal interval and a higher or lower frequency in the other. The subject indicated which interval contained the higher frequency of the two presented in that trial. The variable frequencies were chosen using a decision rule combined with a double-random-alternating staircase that converged on stimulus values that produced 70.7% correct choices. The proportional difference in frequency for criterion responding was computed from the mean of all stimulus values presented in a block of trials. This fraction was plotted as a function of standard spatial frequency. The resulting function shows local maxima and minima that are greater than the standard errors of the means across blocks of trials at a given standard. Functions obtained at 10 deg off the fovea showed a greater range of values than those obtained with central viewing. The results are consistent with the notion that there is a limited number of spatial-frequency channels whose bandwidths are narrow relative to their separation in the spatial-frequency spectrum.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

E S Richter, D Yager. 1984. Spatial-frequency difference thresholds for central and peripheral viewing.. https://doi.org/10.1364/josaa.1.001136

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

The use of an implicit standard for measuring discrimination thresholds.

We measured thresholds for comparing the separation between lines, using either the method of constant stimuli (MCS) or the method of single stimuli (MSS). In the MCS an explicit standard is presented on each trial, whereas in the MSS the standard is the mean of the set. The thresholds for the MSS procedure were nearly identical to those with the MCS procedure, whether or not feedback was used. A statistical model is presented showing how the threshold error estimated by MSS varies according to the number of past stimuli used by the observer to calculate the mean of the set. If the model is an accurate representation of human processing, our observers were averaging over the last 10-20 trials to estimate the implicit standard. Our results show that the explicit standard in the MCS procedure is generally superfluous. Provided that the test range is small, and that the observer is given some practice trials, thresholds measured with MSS procedure are just as precise as those measured with the traditional MCS procedure.

Differential Threshold↗

Using just noticeable differences to interpret test scores.

This study explored the value of obtaining a just noticeable difference (JND) for a test--the difference in scores needed before observers detect a difference in examinees' behavior--as a means of interpreting the practical meaning of scores. Classical psychophysical methods were adapted and applied to the scores of foreign teaching assistants (TAs) on an achievement test, the Test of Spoken English (TSE), and the ratings for English proficiency that the TAs received from their students. The JND for the TSE scores was substantial, as large as the standard deviation of the scores and much larger than the standard error of measurement and guidelines for the d index of effect size for mean differences, suggesting that both sets of standards may highlight score differences that are not practically significant. This study demonstrates the applicability of JNDs for evaluating scores on educational and psychologists' tests.

Differential Threshold↗