Simple time reaction as a function of luminance for various wavelengths

Lit, Alfred; Young, Robert H.; Shaffer, Margaret

doi:10.3758/bf03210320

Cited by 49 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Reaction time in this condition appeared to follow a saturation function. The results are described in terms of the operation of achromatic and chromatic processing channels.Previous data on the effect of wavelength on simple reaction time (RT) have been in remarkable accord: when chromatic lights are matched in luminance at photopic levels, and when these lights are presented on a dimmer, achromatic background, simple RT does not vary with wavelength (Finn & Lit, 1971;Holmes, 1926;Lit, Young, & Shaffer, 1971;Mollon & Krauskopf, 1973;Pollack, 1968).Because the chromatic stimuli in these experiments appeared on a less lurninant background, there were actually two cues accompanying stimulus onset on which subjects could base a response. They could respond to the luminance increment or to the chromo atic signal.…”

mentioning

confidence: 66%

Wavelength effects on simple reaction time

Nissen

Pokorny

1977

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple reaction time was measured to spectral lights matched photometrically in luminance. When these lights were presented on a dimmer achromatic background, reaction time did not vary as a function of wavelength. Moreover, reaction times to white and chromatic lights were the same. When the luminance of the background was the same as that of the chromatic lights, reaction time increased and showed a strong effect of wavelength. Reaction time in this condition appeared to follow a saturation function. The results are described in terms of the operation of achromatic and chromatic processing channels.Previous data on the effect of wavelength on simple reaction time (RT) have been in remarkable accord: when chromatic lights are matched in luminance at photopic levels, and when these lights are presented on a dimmer, achromatic background, simple RT does not vary with wavelength (Finn & Lit, 1971;Holmes, 1926;Lit, Young, & Shaffer, 1971;Mollon & Krauskopf, 1973;Pollack, 1968).Because the chromatic stimuli in these experiments appeared on a less lurninant background, there were actually two cues accompanying stimulus onset on which subjects could base a response. They could respond to the luminance increment or to the chromo atic signal. If they used the former cue, one might not expect a wavelength effect, inasmuch as the size of this luminance increment was matched for all wavelengths.One way to ensure that subjects respond on the basis of the chromatic signal is to use a disjunctive RT task. Jones and Wilkinson (1975) presented subjects with equally luminant white, red, or green stimuli on a dark background. Subjects were instructed to respond only to the chromatic lights and to withhold responses to the white light. They were thus unable to respond on the basis of the luminance signal which was present on every trial. The results showed that RT to green (510 nm) was about 24 msec slower than that to red (645 nm).An alternative way to isolate the effect of color on RT is to match the luminance of the target stimuli and the background so that no luminance change accompanies stimulus onset. When Pieron (1931) measured simple RT under these conditions, he found that RT was shorter to red than to green or blue. However, neither the details of his luminance Some recent studies, using other techniques to measure the effect of wavelength on visual latency, have compared conditions in which the chromatic stimulus is accompanied by a luminance change and those in which it is not. Breton (1977) and Weingarten (1972) found that when subjects made temporal order judgments to chromatic lights presented on a dimmer achromatic background, there was no effect of wavelength. However, when the chromatic stimuli and the background were matched in luminance, the relative latency for red was less than that for green. In Weingarten's data, the difference was 20 to 25msec. Bowen, Lindsey, and Smith (Note I), measuring two-pulse resolution thresholds, found no wavelength effect for chromatic stimuli accompanied by a luminance cue; whe...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 66%

Wavelength effects on simple reaction time

Nissen

Pokorny

1977

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, contradictory findings by Fehrer and Raab (1962) and Lit, Young, and Shaffer (1971) found that reaction time progressively decreased to a final asymptotic value as the ambient illumination increased.…”

Section: Interactions Of Variables Affecting Visual Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Effects of Color Combination and Ambient Illumination on Visual Perception Time with TFT-LCD

Lin

Huang

2009

Percept Mot Skills

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An empirical study was carried out to examine the effects of color combination and ambient illumination on visual perception time using TFT-LCD. The effect of color combination was broken down into two subfactors, luminance contrast ratio and chromaticity contrast. Analysis indicated that the luminance contrast ratio and ambient illumination had significant, though small effects on visual perception. Visual perception time was better at high luminance contrast ratio than at low luminance contrast ratio. Visual perception time under normal ambient illumination was better than at other ambient illumination levels, although the stimulus color had a confounding effect on visual perception time. In general, visual perception time was better for the primary colors than the middle-point colors. Based on the results, normal ambient illumination level and high luminance contrast ratio seemed to be the optimal choice for design of workplace with video display terminals TFT-LCD.

show abstract

“…Photometric quantities based on V() such as lux, lumens and candelas serve as reasonably good rectifying variables for many visual responses [2] including visual acuity [3], reaction times [4][5][6] and disability glare [7,8]. Photometry is less successful at rectifying responses such as brightness [9,10] and discomfort glare [8,[11][12][13][14][15][16][17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spectral sensitivity for extrafoveal discomfort glare

Bullough

2009

Journal of Modern Optics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previously published evidence suggests that the discomfort glare response to bright lights has greater shortwavelength spectral sensitivity than implied by the photopic luminous efficiency function, V(). The present paper summarizes a series of experiments to characterize spectral sensitivity for discomfort glare from nearly monochromatic light sources presented in the near extrafovea (5 and 10 off-axis). The results are consistent with increased participation in the discomfort glare response from short-wavelength cones and greater shortwavelength sensitivity as eccentricity increases. From the results an empirical family of luminous efficiency functions, V DG (), for discomfort glare, is derived. Such data could have implications for specifications of roadway lighting, vehicle headlamps or other light sources that might contribute to discomfort glare.

show abstract

Simple time reaction as a function of luminance for various wavelengths

Cited by 49 publications

References 12 publications

Wavelength effects on simple reaction time

Wavelength effects on simple reaction time

Effects of Color Combination and Ambient Illumination on Visual Perception Time with TFT-LCD

Spectral sensitivity for extrafoveal discomfort glare

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About