Abstract

The accuracy of some spatial discriminations, including spatial frequency and orientation, is independent of the contrasts of the stimuli discriminated except when contrasts are near the detection threshold. This fact is surprising because higher contrasts should improve signal-to-noise ratios and performance. Two alternative explanations of this puzzle are examined, using a signal-detection-theory vector model: (1) noise increases with stimulus contrast in such a way that signal-to-noise ratios remain constant; (2) noise is constant, but the difference signal generated by each individual tuned mechanism is independent of contrast because the response function of the mechanism becomes compressive (approximately logarithmic) at a low contrast. The alternative explanations generate different predictions, which have been tested in several experiments. The results reject alternative (1) as a model of suprathreshold discrimination and give mixed support to alternative (2).

© 1989 Optical Society of America

Contrast gain control and fine spatial discriminations

James P. Thomas and Lynn A. Olzak
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 14(9) 2392-2405 (1997)

Independent processing of suprathreshold spatial gratings as a function of their separation in spatial frequency

James P. Thomas
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 6(7) 1102-1111 (1989)

Motion thresholds can be predicted from contrast discrimination

Bettina L. Beard, Stanley A. Klein, and Thom Carney
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 14(9) 2449-2470 (1997)

Simultaneous discrimination of the spatial frequency and contrast of periodic stimuli

Mark W. Greenlee and James P. Thomas
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 10(3) 395-404 (1993)

Effects of spatial frequency, duration, and contrast on discriminating motion directions

Jian Yang and Scott B. Stevenson
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 14(9) 2041-2048 (1997)