Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31251807›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2019

Dynamics of contrast adaptation in central and peripheral vision.

Yi Gao, Michael A Webster, Fang Jiang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Visual adaptation stronger at the horizontal than the vertical meridian: Linking performance with V1 cortical surface area.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Repulsive Aftereffects of Visual Space.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yi GaoDepartment of Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, USA.
Michael A WebsterDepartment of Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, USA.
Fang JiangDepartment of Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, USA.

Funding

SALIENCE, ADAPTATION, AND NATURAL IMAGE STATISTICSR01EY010834 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA RENO · PI WEBSTER, MICHAEL A · 2000 to 2023
$4.6M
Cross-modal motion responses in blind and deaf humansR00EY023268 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA RENO · PI JIANG, FANG · 2015 to 2017
$747k
Cross-modal motion responses in blind and deaf humansK99EY023268 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI JIANG, FANG · 2013 to 2014
$191k
COLOR CONTRAST ADAPTATIONR29EY010834 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA RENO · PI WEBSTER, MICHAEL A · 1995 to 1999
–
NEI NIH HHS K99 EY023268NEI NIH HHS R00 EY023268NEI NIH HHS R01 EY010834NEI NIH HHS R29 EY010834
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adaptation aftereffects are generally stronger for peripheral than for foveal viewing. We examined whether there are also differences in the dynamics of visual adaptation in central and peripheral vision. We tracked the time course of contrast adaptation to binocularly presented Gabor patterns in both the central visual field (within 5°) and in the periphery (beyond 10° eccentricity) using a yes/no detection task to monitor contrast thresholds. Consistent with previous studies, sensitivity losses were stronger in the periphery than in the center when adapting to equivalent high contrast (90% contrast) patterns. The time course of the threshold changes was fitted with separate exponential functions to estimate the time constants during the adapt and post-adapt phases. When adapting to equivalent high contrast, adaptation effects built up and decayed more slowly in the periphery compared with central adaptation. Surprisingly, the aftereffect in the periphery did not decay completely to the baseline within the monitored post-adapt period (400 s), and instead asymptoted to a higher level than for central adaptation. Even when contrast was reduced to one-third (30% contrast) of the central contrast, peripheral adaptation remained stronger and decayed more slowly. This slower dynamic was also confirmed at suprathreshold test contrasts by tracking tilt-aftereffects with a 2AFC orientation discrimination task. Our results indicate that the dynamics of contrast adaptation differ between central and peripheral vision, with the periphery adapting not only more strongly but also more slowly, and provide another example of potential qualitative processing differences between central and peripheral vision.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PhysiologicalContrast SensitivityFemaleHumansMaleOrientationVisual FieldsVisual Perception

Identifiers

PMID31251807
PMCPMC6602361

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.