title: Detection of changes in luminance distributions.
abstract: How well can observers detect the presence of a change in luminance distributions? Performance was measured in three experiments. Observers viewed pairs of grayscale images on a calibrated CRT display. Each image was a checkerboard. All luminances in one image of each pair consisted of random draws from a single probability distribution. For the other image, some patch luminances consisted of random draws from that same distribution, while the rest of the patch luminances (test patches) consisted of random draws from a second distribution. The observers' task was to pick the image with luminances drawn from two distributions. The parameters of the second distribution that led to 75% correct performance were determined across manipulations of (1) the number of test patches, (2) the observers' certainty about test patch location, and (3) the geometric structure of the images. Performance improved with number of test patches and location certainty. The geometric manipulations did not affect performance. An ideal observer model with high efficiency fit the data well and a classification image analysis showed a similar use of information by the ideal and human observers, indicating that observers can make effective use of photometric information in our distribution discrimination task.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, USA. thomyle@sas.upenn.edu
authors.forename: Thomas Y
authors.initials: TY
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.forename: David H
authors.initials: DH
authors.lastname: Brainard
mesh_terms: D055984:Cathode Ray Tube; D003463:Cues; D004193:Discrimination Learning / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D005556:Form Perception / Q000502:physiology*; D006801:Humans; D008029:Lighting; D008297:Male; D008959:Models, Neurological; D010775:Photic Stimulation / Q000379:methods*; D012684:Sensory Thresholds / Q000502:physiology; D013499:Surface Properties; D055815:Young Adult
references.citation: Perception. 1997;26(4):379-94
references.pmid: 9404489
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 1984 May;35(5):407-22
references.pmid: 6462867
references.citation: Vision Res. 1996 Jul;36(13):1893-906
references.pmid: 8759429
references.citation: J Exp Psychol. 1954 Apr;47(4):263-6
references.pmid: 13152306
references.citation: J Vis. 2005 Jan 28;5(1):45-57
references.pmid: 15831066
references.citation: Vision Res. 1993 Jan;33(2):173-93
references.pmid: 8447091
references.citation: J Vis. 2010 Jul 16;10(9):1
references.pmid: 20884599
references.citation: Psychol Res. 1976 Oct 22;39(1):1-16
references.pmid: 1005625
references.citation: Psychol Res. 1985;47(1):19-25
references.pmid: 4001273
references.citation: Nature. 2005 Mar 3;434(7029):79-83
references.pmid: 15744303
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1999 Oct;106(4):795-834
references.pmid: 10560329
references.citation: Vision Res. 1987;27(11):1915-24
references.pmid: 3447346
references.citation: J Vis. 2010 May 01;10(5):6
references.pmid: 20616121
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 2001 Nov;63(8):1314-29
references.pmid: 11800459
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2002 Jul;109(3):492-519
references.pmid: 12088242
references.citation: J Vis. 2004 Sep 08;4(9):747-63
references.pmid: 15493968
references.citation: J Exp Psychol. 1959 Oct;58:267-74
references.pmid: 13798043
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 1971 Feb;49(2):Suppl 2:467+
references.pmid: 5541744
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2002 Mar;13(2):142-9
references.pmid: 11933998
references.citation: J Vis. 2002;2(1):79-104
references.pmid: 12678598
references.citation: J Vis. 2010 Nov 05;10(9):12
references.pmid: 21057137
references.citation: Perception. 2007;36(11):1595-610
references.pmid: 18265841
references.citation: Vision Res. 1988;28(1):115-32
references.pmid: 3413989
references.citation: Perception. 2006;35(5):625-45
references.pmid: 16836054
references.citation: Vision Res. 1992 Jul;32(7):1359-66
references.pmid: 1455708
references.citation: Nature. 1991 May 16;351(6323):228-30
references.pmid: 2041568
references.citation: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1980 Jul 8;290(1038):71-82
references.pmid: 6106243
references.citation: J Vis. 2011 May 02;11(5):
references.pmid: 21536727
references.citation: J Exp Psychol. 1961 May;61:368-75
references.pmid: 13688391
references.citation: J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 2000 Feb;17(2):225-31
references.pmid: 10680624
references.citation: Psychol Res. 1985;47(4):185-202
references.pmid: 4089080
references.citation: Science. 1977 Jan 14;195(4274):185-7
references.pmid: 831266
references.citation: J Vis. 2003;3(8):541-53
references.pmid: 14632606
references.citation: J Vis. 2010 Dec 27;10(9):
references.pmid: 21187347
references.citation: PLoS One. 2009 Oct 13;4(10):e7432
references.pmid: 19823590
references.citation: Curr Biol. 2000 Jun 1;10(11):663-6
references.pmid: 10837252
references.citation: J Vis. 2010 Nov 24;10(9):14
references.pmid: 21106676
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 1980 Dec;28(6):527-38
references.pmid: 7208266
references.citation: J Acoust Soc Am. 2004 Oct;116(4 Pt 1):2234-47
references.pmid: 15532655
references.citation: J Vis. 2006 Feb 28;6(4):335-55
references.pmid: 16889473
references.citation: Science. 1993 Dec 24;262(5142):2042-4
references.pmid: 8266102
references.citation: Perception. 1997;26(4):419-53
references.pmid: 9404492