Field D J, Hess R F
Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.
Vision Res. 1996 Jul;36(14):2121-4. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(95)00265-0.
In a recent paper of ours [Hess & Field (1993). Vision Research, 33, 2663-2670], we claim that there was a predictable relationship between position errors and contrast errors for an undersampled system. In this paper we re-state our main points. We feel that the response to that paper by Levi and Klein in the accompanying article does not require us to produce changes in our original position. We believe that the data support the notion that the principal causes of the positional errors in the normal periphery and the in the amblyopic visual system are due to uncalibrated distortions in the local signs of visual neurons. We believe that undersampling plays a major role in producing positional errors only in the far periphery at, or very near, the acuity limit. We maintain that our initial studies provide strong evidence that undersampling is insufficient as an explanation for the positional errors in the periphery of normals (Hess & Field, 1993) or the central field of amblyopes [Hess & Field (1994). Vision Research, 34, 3397-3406.
在我们最近的一篇论文中[赫斯与菲尔德（1993年）。《视觉研究》，第33卷，第2663 - 2670页]，我们声称对于一个欠采样系统，位置误差和对比度误差之间存在可预测的关系。在本文中，我们重申我们的主要观点。我们认为利瓦伊和克莱因在随附文章中对那篇论文的回应并不要求我们改变我们原来的立场。我们相信这些数据支持这样一种观点，即正常周边视野和弱视视觉系统中位置误差的主要原因是视觉神经元局部信号的未校准扭曲。我们认为欠采样仅在远周边视野处于或非常接近敏锐度极限时，才在产生位置误差中起主要作用。我们坚持认为我们最初的研究提供了有力证据，即欠采样不足以解释正常人周边视野（赫斯与菲尔德，1993年）或弱视患者中心视野[赫斯与菲尔德（1994年）。《视觉研究》，第34卷，第3397 - 3406页]中的位置误差。
