Effect of Forced-Choice vs Magnitude-Estimation Measures on the Waveform of Metacontrast Functions*
- 1 July 1970
- journal article
- Published by Optica Publishing Group in Journal of the Optical Society of America
- Vol. 60 (7), 978-980
- https://doi.org/10.1364/josa.60.000978
Abstract
Metacontrast functions were obtained for three subjects using forced-choice and magnitude-estimation response measures, and for a fourth subject using forced choice alone. The functions from these two measures were in every case U shaped and did not differ significantly from each other, even though the stimuli used for each measure differed slightly, and the forced-choice study was done three months after the magnitude-estimation study. Thus, U-shaped metacontrast functions are not artifacts of subjective response criteria. The relative merits of the subjective and objective response indicators as measures of metacontrast are discussed.Keywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- Failure to replicate a reported U-shaped visual masking functionPsychonomic Science, 1969
- Method, findings, and theory in studies of visual masking.Psychological Bulletin, 1968
- A Rashevsky-Landahl neural net: Simulation of metacontrast.Psychological Review, 1968
- An analysis of certain factors responsible for nonmonotonic backward masking functions.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1967
- Retroactive brightness enhancement with brief paired flashes of lightVision Research, 1965
- A u-shaped backward masking function in visionPsychonomic Science, 1965