Right hemisphere specialization for color detection

Three experiments were carried out to investigate hemispheric asymmetry in color processing among normal participants. In Experiment 1, it was shown that the reaction times (RTs) of the dominant and non-dominant hands assessed using a visual target presented at the central visual field, were not significantly different. In Experiment 2, RTs of ipsilateral hands to lateralized chromatic stimuli revealed that the processing time was 17 ms shorter in the right hemisphere (RH) than that in the left hemisphere among the right-handed participants, whereas no significant difference was found among the left-handed participants. On the other hand, RTs to lateralized achromatic stimuli showed no such asymmetry among both the right- and left-handed participants (Experiment 3). These findings strongly suggest RH superiority for detection of color among right-handed individuals.     

Infants' ability to use luminance information to individuate objects

Recent research indicates that infants first use form and then surface features as the basis for individuating objects. However, very little is known about the underlying basis for infants' differential sensitivity to form than surface features. The present research assessed infants' sensitivity to luminance differences. Like other surface properties, luminance information typically reveals little about an object. Unlike other surface properties (e.g. pattern, color), the visual system can detect luminance differences at birth. The outcome of two experiments indicated that 11.5-month-olds, but not 7.5-month-olds, used luminance differences to individuate objects. These results suggest that it is not the age at which infants can detect a feature, but the nature of the information carried by the feature, that determines infants' capacity to individuate objects.     

Effects of varying target luminance and cue luminance on attentional effects of spatial cues

Attentional effects of letter cues on target processing were investigated in a bilateral spatial cueing paradigm. Luminance contrast of the cue stimuli and of the target stimuli were both manipulated. Consistent with predictions derived from theoretical models of visual attention, manipulating cue luminance and target luminance had very different effects on performance. In agreement with the dorsal stream attention hypothesis (Marrett et al., 2011) orienting effects were unaffected by changes in cue luminance; but in agreement with the work of Reynolds, Pasternak, and Desimone (2000) and Carrasco, Ling, and Read (2004) orienting effects were strongly modulated by changes in the luminance and perceptual quality of the target. Theoretical implications of the results are considered and the data are explained in terms of a sensory enhancement effect, whereby attention amplifies the neuronal responses for attended stimuli.     

Asynchronous perception of motion and luminance change

Observers were asked to indicate when a target moving on a circular trajectory changed its luminance. The judged position of the luminance change was displaced from the true position in the direction of motion, indicating differences between the times-to-consciousness of motion and luminance change. Motion was processed faster than luminance change. The latency difference was more pronounced for a small (116–134 ms) than for a large luminance decrement (37 ms). The results show that first-order motion is perceived before an accurate representation of luminance is available. These findings are consistent with current accounts of the flash-lag effect. Two control experiments ruled out that the results were due to a general forward tendency. Localization of the target when an auditory signal was presented did not produce forward displacement, and the judged onset of motion was not shifted in the direction of motion.     

Flexible contrast gain control in the right hemisphere

This study investigates whether the right hemisphere has more flexible contrast gain control settings for the identification of spatial frequency. Right-handed participants identified 1 and 9 cycles per degree sinusoidal gratings presented either to the left visual field-right hemisphere (LVF-RH) or the right visual field-left hemisphere (RVF-LH). When luminance contrast was randomized across a wide range (20-60%), performance gradually improved with contrast in the LVF-RH. Conversely, performance in the RVF-LH was disrupted and saturated for 20 and 60% of contrast, respectively, leading to a LVF-RH advantage for these contrast levels. When contrast was blocked or randomized for a smaller range (30-50%), the LVF-RH advantage was diminished. Flexible contrast gain control is needed when contrast is randomized across a wide range, but not when it is blocked or randomized across a smaller range. The results therefore suggest that the right hemisphere is able to process spatial frequency information across a wider range of contrast levels than is the left hemisphere.     

The effects of dimmable road lighting: A comparison of measured and perceived visibility

By dimming road lighting, energy can be conserved without compromising traffic safety. This paper presents a study carried out on the effect of different lighting levels from road luminaires on drivers’ visual performance on a low traffic urban road. The small uniform target was used to evaluate the visibility performance of the drivers. The results obtained from subjective graded visibility were compared with contrast and the Adrian model. Results indicated a strong correlation between subjective graded visibility and contrast (R² = 0.94) and a positive correlation between subjective graded visibility and the Adrian model (R² = 0.88). Target’s location in relation to road luminaires had a considerable effect on its visibility. However, visibility is not a monotonic function of road lighting level. In the absence of glare from an oncoming car, 49% (3557 lm) of road lighting intensity provided better contrast and mean visibility than 100% (7252 lm) and 71% (5179 lm) of road lighting intensities. The glare from oncoming cars reduced visibility. However, no statistically significant effect of road lighting level on visibility under glare could be found.