Trußner Tomke, Albrecht Thorsten, Mattler Uwe
Department of Experimental Psychology, Georg Elias Müller Institute, University of Goettingen, Goßlertstr. 14, 37077, Goettingen, Germany.
Behav Res Methods. 2024 Dec 30;57(1):30. doi: 10.3758/s13428-024-02526-w.
Most vision labs have had to replace the formerly dominant CRT screens with LCDs and several studies have investigated whether changing the display type leads to changes in perceptual phenomena, since fundamental properties of the stimulation, e.g., the transition time between frames, differ between these different display technologies. While many phenomena have proven robust, Kihara et al. (2010) reported different metacontrast masking functions on LCDs compared to CRTs. This difference poses a challenge for the integration of new LCD-based findings with the established knowledge from studies with CRTs and requires theoretical accounts that consider the effects of different display types. However, before further conclusions can be drawn, the basic findings should be secured. Therefore, we tried to reproduce the display type effect by comparing metacontrast masking on an LCD and a CRT in two experiments. Our approach differs from the previous study by increasing the power and reliability of the measurements and carefully matching the two display types. In addition to display type, we varied target-mask stimulus-onset asynchrony (SOA) and stimulus-background polarity. Regardless of display type and polarity, we found the typical type-B masking functions. Evidence for a SOA-dependent display type effect in the black-on-white polarity condition from Experiment 1 was not replicated in Experiment 2. Overall, the results indicate that metacontrast masking effects on objective and subjective measurements, i.e., discriminatory sensitivity and phenomenological reports, do not vary significantly with display technologies. This lack of display effects is discussed in the context of current theories of metacontrast masking.
大多数视觉实验室不得不将以前占主导地位的阴极射线管（CRT）屏幕更换为液晶显示器（LCD），并且有几项研究调查了改变显示类型是否会导致感知现象的变化，因为这些不同显示技术之间刺激的基本属性，例如帧之间的转换时间，是不同的。虽然许多现象已被证明具有稳健性，但ihara等人（2010年）报告称，与CRT相比，LCD上的元对比掩蔽功能有所不同。这种差异给将基于LCD的新发现与CRT研究的既定知识整合带来了挑战，并且需要考虑不同显示类型影响的理论解释。然而，在得出进一步结论之前，基本发现应该得到确证。因此，我们试图通过在两个实验中比较LCD和CRT上的元对比掩蔽来重现显示类型效应。我们的方法与之前的研究不同，通过提高测量的效力和可靠性，并仔细匹配这两种显示类型。除了显示类型，我们还改变了目标 - 掩蔽刺激起始异步性（SOA）和刺激 - 背景极性。无论显示类型和极性如何，我们都发现了典型的B型掩蔽函数。实验1中在白上黑极性条件下依赖SOA的显示类型效应的证据在实验2中未得到重现。总体而言，结果表明，元对比掩蔽对客观和主观测量（即辨别敏感性和现象学报告）的影响不会因显示技术而有显著差异。在当前元对比掩蔽理论的背景下讨论了这种缺乏显示效应的情况。
