4.3 Article

Linking impulse response functions to reaction time: Rod and cone reaction time data and a computational model

期刊

VISION RESEARCH
卷 47, 期 8, 页码 1060-1074

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2006.11.027

关键词

reaction time; impulse response; temporal contrast sensitivity; rod; cone; increment; decrement

资金

  1. NEI NIH HHS [R01 EY000901, R01 EY000901-33, EY00901] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Reaction times for incremental and decremental stimuli were measured at five suprathreshold contrasts for six retinal illuminance levels where rods alone (0.002-0.2 Trolands), rods and cones (2-20 Trolands) or cones alone (200 Trolands) mediated detection. A 4-primary photostimulator allowed independent control of rod or cone excitations. This is the first report of reaction times to isolated rod or cone stimuli at mesopic light levels under the same adaptation conditions. The main findings are: (1) For rods, responses to decrements were faster than increments, but cone reaction times were closely similar. (2) At light levels where both systems were functional, rod reaction times were similar to 20 ins longer. The data were fitted with a computational model that incorporates rod and cone impulse response functions and a stimulus-dependent neural sensory component that triggers a motor response. Rod and cone impulse response functions were derived from published psychophysical two-pulse threshold data and temporal modulation transfer functions. The model fits were accomplished with a limited number of free parameters: two global parameters to estimate the irreducible minimum reaction time for each receptor type, and one local parameter for each reaction time versus contrast function. This is the first model to provide a neural basis for the variation in reaction time with retinal illuminance, stimulus contrast, stimulus polarity, and receptor class modulated. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据