Julie Calvert

Temporal properties of the visual responses to luminance and contrast modulated noise

Vision is sensitive to first-order luminance modulations and second-order modulations of carrier contrast. Our knowledge of the temporal properties of second-order vision is insufficient and contradictory. Using temporal summation and reaction time paradigms, we found that the type of visual noise (static or dynamic) determines the temporal properties of the responses to luminance and contrast modulations. In the presence of static noise, the temporal responses to both types of modulation of low and higher spatial frequencies were transient. When dynamic noise was used, the temporal responses to luminance and contrast modulations of higher spatial frequencies were sustained. At low spatial frequency, however, luminance modulations elicited transient responses, while contrast modulated dynamic noise produced sustained responses. The reaction times to near-threshold contrast modulations of low spatial frequency were slower than those to first-order patterns and they did not significantly differ at modulations of higher spatial frequency. The results suggest that the temporal characteristics of first-stage linear filters which feed the second-order pathway may determine the temporal responses to contrast modulated noise.

Why is second-order vision less efficient than first-order vision?

Research has shown that the sensitivity to second-order modulations of carrier contrast is lower than that to first-order luminance modulations stimuli. We sought to compare the efficiency of processing first- and second-order information. Employing a phase-discrimination paradigm we found that when humans were given sufficient a priori information of signal parameters they detected both luminance and contrast modulations of 0.6 and 2c/deg by a phase-sensitive algorithm. The overall detection efficiency for second-order patterns, however, was lower that that for first-order stimuli. To study the factors which limit the efficiency of first- and second-order vision, we measured detection performance for luminance and contrast modulations of 0.6 and 2c/deg embedded in Gaussian noise. The results showed that the detection of second-order patterns had lower sampling efficiency and higher additive internal noise as compared to the detection of first-order stimuli. Classification images for detecting contrast modulations of 2c/deg resembled the side-band component of the contrast modulations which suggests that human observers may detect contrast modulations of a sinusoidal carrier using first-order luminance channels. The lower sensitivity of the mechanism detecting second-order patterns might be due to higher levels of additive internal noise and lower sampling efficiency than those of the mechanism analysing first-order patterns.

Human cortical responses to contrast modulations of visual noise

We studied visual evoked potentials (VEPs) elicited by second-order contrast modulations of binary dynamic noise and first-order luminance modulations. Using a 3-point Laplacian operator centred on Oz, we found that contrast modulations of both low and higher spatial frequencies elicited a negative component whose latency was about 200 ms. The latency of this component was significantly longer than that of the early Laplacian components to first-order luminance modulations. These findings could be due to slower first-stage linear filters and additional processing stages of the second-order pathway. The topographical analysis of scalp recorded VEPs to central and half-field stimulation has suggested that the responses to second-order patterns are likely to be generated by neuronal structures within the primary visual cortex which may have inputs from extrastriate neurons via feedback connections.