Abstract
Motion thresholds were determined in the fovea and in the horizontal peripheral meridian under conditions of practice, correction of refractive error, and feedback. While foveal determinations did not change significantly, peripheral motion thresholds were lowered for all conditions. Both practice and practice with feedback produced significantly better motion discrimination, these effects showing a longevity of several months. However, the largest improvement resulted from correction of peripheral refractive error, which also reduced individual differences. This suggests that peripheral sensitivity to movement is ordinarily limited primarily by dioptric rather than neural factors. Implications for perceptual learning and peripheral vision research are discussed.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Cornsweet, T. N. The staircase method in psychophysics. American Journal of Psychology, 1962, 75, 485–491.
Cornsweet, T. N., & Crane, H. D. Training the visual accommodation system. Vision Research, 1973, 13, 713–715.
Enoch, J. J., Sunga, R. & Bachman, E. A static perimetric technique believed to test receptive field properties: I. Extension of the Westheim er experiments on spatial interaction. American Journal of Ophthalmology, 1970, 69, 113–126.
Fankhauser, F., & Enoch, J. M. The effects of blur on perimetric thresholds. Archives of Ophthalmology, 1962, 68, 240–251.
Ferrée, C. E., & Rand, G. Interpretation of refractive conditions in the peripheral field of vision. Archives of Ophthalmology, 1933, 9, 925–938.
Gibson, E. J.Principles of perceptual learning and development. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1969. Pp. 163–191.
Graham, C. H. Perception of movement. In C. H. Graham (Ed.),Vision and visual perception. New York: Wiley, 1965.
LeGrand, Y.Form and space vision. (Rev. ed.) (Trans. M. Mülodot and G. G. Heath.) Blooming ton: Indiana University Press, 1967. Pp. 178–192.
Leibowitz, H. W. The relation between the rate threshold for the perception of movement and luminance for various durations of exposure. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1955, 49, 209–214.
Leibowitz, H. W., Johnson, C. A., & Isabelle, E. Peripheral motion detection and refractive error. Science, 1972, 177, 1207–1208.
Low, F. N. Some characteristics of peripheral visual performance. American Journal of Physiology, 1946, 146, 573–584.
Saugstad, P., & Lie, I. Training of peripheral visual acuity. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 1964, 5, 218–224.
Teuber, H. L., Battersby, W. S., & Bender, M. B.Visual field defects after penetrating missile sounds of the brain. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1960. Pp. 9–10.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Supported by Grant MH08061 from the National Institute of Mental Health and Grant GY-9866 from the National Science Foundation. Aspects of the data were presented to The Japanese Psychological Association (1972), The Psychonomic Society (1972), and the Eastern Psychological Association (1973). The authors are indebted to Ed Isabelle, Takeo Iida, Ken Shiina, and Judy Meighan for help and assistance, to Jay Enoch for advice and encouragement, and to Larry G. Kerr for his valuable comments on the manuscript.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Johnson, C.A., Leibowitz, H.W. Practice, refractive error, and feedback as factors influencing peripheral motion thresholds. Perception & Psychophysics 15, 276–280 (1974). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213944
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213944