Bowker D O, Tulunay-Keesey U
J Opt Soc Am. 1983 Apr;73(4):427-35. doi: 10.1364/josa.73.000427.
Contrast sensitivities to countermodulating gratings were measured with a two-alternative temporal forced-choice procedure following adaptation to a static grating of the same spatial frequency, a homogeneous flickering field of the same temporal frequency, or a countermodulating grating of identical spatial and temporal frequencies. At high spatial frequencies, the temporal-frequency content of the adaptation was not critical, that is, a countermodulating adaptation grating was only slightly more effective at raising threshold than was a static adaptation grating. At low spatial frequencies, the sensitivity to countermodulating test gratings could not be reduced by either a high-contrast stimulus matching the test in the spatial domain only or by one matching the test in the temporal domain only. Adapting to a high-contrast stimulus matching the countermodulating test grating in both spatial- and temporal-frequency domains was effective at reducing test sensitivity for one observer but not for another.
在适应相同空间频率的静态光栅、相同时间频率的均匀闪烁场或相同空间和时间频率的反调制光栅之后,采用双选时间强制选择程序测量对反调制光栅的对比度敏感度。在高空间频率下,适应刺激的时间频率内容并不关键,也就是说,反调制适应光栅在提高阈值方面仅比静态适应光栅略有效。在低空间频率下,仅在空间域匹配测试的高对比度刺激或仅在时间域匹配测试的刺激均不能降低对反调制测试光栅的敏感度。在空间和时间频率域均匹配反调制测试光栅的高对比度刺激对一名观察者有效降低了测试敏感度,但对另一名观察者则无效。