Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Mulholland, Padraig J.; Redmond, Tony; Garway-Heath, David F.; Zlatkova, Margarita B.; Anderson, Roger S. (2015)
Publisher: Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: RE

Classified by OpenAIRE into

mesheuropmc: genetic structures
Purpose: To estimate the critical duration of temporal summation for achromatic Goldmann III stimuli under the conditions of standard automated perimetry (SAP) and quantify response variability for short duration stimuli. Methods: Contrast thresholds were gathered using the method of constant stimuli for seven circular (0.48° diameter) incremental stimuli of varying duration (sum-of-frames equivalent: 8.3-198.3 msec), at an eccentricity of 8.8° along the four principal meridians of the visual field in two healthy, psychophysically experienced observers. Stimuli were presented on a high-resolution CRT display with a background luminance of 10 cd/m2. Psychometric functions were fitted using a probit model and non-parametric local linear analysis. The critical duration was estimated using iterative two-phase regression analysis, the results also being compared with values produced using previously published methods of analysis. Results: The median critical duration estimated using iterative two-phase regression analysis was 27.7 msec (IQR 22.5-29.8). A slight steepening of the psychometric function slope (lower variability) was observed for longer stimulus durations, using both probit and local-linear analysis techniques, but this was not statistically significant. Conclusions: Critical duration estimates in this study are substantially shorter than those previously reported for a Goldmann III stimulus under the conditions of SAP. Further work is required to firmly establish the relationship between measurement variability and the degree of local temporal and spatial summation.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. McDougall W. The variation of the intensity of visual sensation with the duration of the stimulus. Br J Psychol. 1904;1:151- 189.
    • 2. Barlow HB. Temporal and spatial summation in human vision at different background intensities. J Physiol (Lond). 1958; 141:337-350.
    • 3. Watson AB. Temporal sensitivity. In: Boff KR, Kaufman L, Thomas JP, eds. Handbook of Perception and Human Performance. New York: Wiley; 1986:6.1-6.43.
    • 4. Funkhouser AT, Fankhauser F. Temporal summation measurements with the Octopus 1-2-3 perimeter. Ger J Ophthalmol. 1994;3:120-128.
    • 5. Dannheim F, Drance S. Studies of temporal summation of central retinal areas in normal people of all ages. Ophthalmol Res. 1971;2:295-303.
    • 6. Dannheim F, Drance S. Psychovisual disturbances in glaucoma: a study of temporal and spatial summation. Arch Ophthalmol. 1974;91:463-468.
    • 7. Bruder G, Kietzman M. Visual temporal integration for threshold, signal detectability, and reaction time measures. Atten Percept Psychophys. 1973;13:293-300.
    • 8. Graham C, Margaria R. Area and the intensity-time relation in the peripheral retina. Am J Physiol. 1935;113:299-305.
    • 9. International Council of Ophthalmology. Perimetric Standards and Perimetric Glossary of the International Council of Ophthalmology. The Hague: Dr W. Junk bv Publishers; 1979.
    • 10. Henson DB. Visual Fields. 2nd ed. Oxford: ButterworthHeinemann; 2000.
    • 11. Kietzman M, Gillam B. Visual temporal integration and simple reaction time. Atten Percept Psychophys. 1972;11:333-340.
    • 12. Graham C, Cook C. Visual acuity as a function of intensity and exposure-time. Am J Psychol. 1937;49:654-661.
    • 13. Okuyama S, Matsumoto C, Uyama K, Otsuiand O, Otori T. The influence of the stimulus duration on perimetric thresholds in the central 308 of the visual field. In: Mills RP, Wall M, eds. Perimetry Update 1994/95 Proceedings of the XIth International Perimetric Society Meeting. New York: Kugler; 1995: 241-248.
    • 14. Owen W. Spatio-temporal integration in the human peripheral retina. Vision Res. 1972;12:1011-1026.
    • 15. Baumgardt E, Hillmann B. Duration and size as determinants of peripheral retinal response. J Opt Soc Am A. 1961;51:340-344.
    • 16. Baumgardt E. Visual spatial and temporal summation. Nature. 1959;184:1951-1952.
    • 17. Krakau C. Temporal summation and perimetry. Ophthalmic Res. 1989;21:49-55.
    • 18. Chauhan B, Tompkins JD, LeBlanc RP, McCormick TA. Characteristics of frequency-of-seeing curves in normal subjects, patients with suspected glaucoma, and patients with glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;34:3534-3540.
    • 19. Henson DB, Chaudry S, Artes PH, Faragher EB, Ansons A. Response variability in the visual field: comparison of optic neuritis, glaucoma, ocular hypertension, and normal eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:417-421.
    • 20. Gilpin LB, Stewart WC, Hunt HH, Broom CD. Threshold variability using different Goldmann stimulus sizes. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh). 1990;68:674-676.
    • 21. Zychaluk K, Foster DH. Model-free estimation of the psychometric function. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2009;71:1414- 1425.
    • 22. Wichmann FA, Hill NJ. The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling, and goodness of fit. Percept Psychophys. 2001;63: 1293-1313.
    • 23. Krauskopf J, Mollon JD. The independence of the temporal integration properties of individual chromatic mechanisms in the human eye. J Physiol. 1971;219:611-623.
    • 24. Seber GAF, Wild CJ. Nonlinear Regression. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1989.
    • 25. Redmond T, Garway-Heath DF, Zlatkova MB, Anderson RS. Sensitivity loss in early glaucoma can be mapped to an enlargement of the area of complete spatial summation. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;51:6540-6548.
    • 26. Wilson ME. Spatial and temporal summation in impaired regions of the visual field. J Physiol. 1967;189:189-208.
    • 27. Wall M, Kutzko KE, Chauhan BC. Variability in patients with glaucomatous visual field damage is reduced using size V stimuli. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997;38:426-435.
    • 28. Wall M, Doyle CK, Zamba KD, Artes P, Johnson CA. The repeatability of mean defect with size III and size V standard automated perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54: 1345-1351.
    • 29. Artes PH, Hutchison DM, Nicolela MT, LeBlanc RP, Chauhan BC. Threshold and variability properties of matrix frequencydoubling technology and standard automated perimetry in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46:2451-2457.
    • 30. Russell RA, Crabb DP, Malik R, Garway-Heath DF. The relationship between variability and sensitivity in large-scale longitudinal visual field data. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012; 53:5985-5990.
    • 31. Verdon-Roe GM, Westcott MC, Viswanathan AC, Fitzke FW, Garway-Heath DF. Exploration of the psychophysics of a motion displacement hyperacuity stimulus. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47:4847-4855.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article