{"title":"Further Examination of the Pulsed- and Steady-Pedestal Paradigms under Hypothetical Parvocellular- and Magnocellular-Biased Conditions.","authors":"Jaeseon Song, Bruno G Breitmeyer, James M Brown","doi":"10.3390/vision8020028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The pulsed- and steady-pedestal paradigms were designed to track increment thresholds (Δ<i>C</i>) as a function of pedestal contrast (C) for the parvocellular (P) and magnocellular (M) systems, respectively. These paradigms produce contrasting results: linear relationships between Δ<i>C</i> and <i>C</i> are observed in the pulsed-pedestal paradigm, indicative of the P system's processing, while the steady-pedestal paradigm reveals nonlinear functions, characteristic of the M system's response. However, we recently found the P model fits better than the M model for both paradigms, using Gabor stimuli biased towards the M or P systems based on their sensitivity to color and spatial frequency. Here, we used two-square pedestals under green vs. red light in the lower-left vs. upper-right visual fields to bias processing towards the M vs. P system, respectively. Based on our previous findings, we predicted the following: (1) steeper Δ<i>C</i> vs. <i>C</i> functions with the pulsed than the steady pedestal due to different task demands; (2) lower Δ<i>C</i>s in the upper-right vs. lower-left quadrant due to its bias towards P-system processing there; (3) no effect of color, since both paradigms track the P-system; and, most importantly (4) contrast gain should not be higher for the steady than for the pulsed pedestal. In general, our predictions were confirmed, replicating our previous findings and providing further evidence questioning the general validity of using the pulsed- and steady-pedestal paradigms to differentiate the P and M systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":36586,"journal":{"name":"Vision (Switzerland)","volume":"8 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11130818/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vision (Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/vision8020028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The pulsed- and steady-pedestal paradigms were designed to track increment thresholds (ΔC) as a function of pedestal contrast (C) for the parvocellular (P) and magnocellular (M) systems, respectively. These paradigms produce contrasting results: linear relationships between ΔC and C are observed in the pulsed-pedestal paradigm, indicative of the P system's processing, while the steady-pedestal paradigm reveals nonlinear functions, characteristic of the M system's response. However, we recently found the P model fits better than the M model for both paradigms, using Gabor stimuli biased towards the M or P systems based on their sensitivity to color and spatial frequency. Here, we used two-square pedestals under green vs. red light in the lower-left vs. upper-right visual fields to bias processing towards the M vs. P system, respectively. Based on our previous findings, we predicted the following: (1) steeper ΔC vs. C functions with the pulsed than the steady pedestal due to different task demands; (2) lower ΔCs in the upper-right vs. lower-left quadrant due to its bias towards P-system processing there; (3) no effect of color, since both paradigms track the P-system; and, most importantly (4) contrast gain should not be higher for the steady than for the pulsed pedestal. In general, our predictions were confirmed, replicating our previous findings and providing further evidence questioning the general validity of using the pulsed- and steady-pedestal paradigms to differentiate the P and M systems.
脉冲式踏板范式和稳定式踏板范式的设计分别是为了跟踪副细胞(P)和磁细胞(M)系统的增量阈值(ΔC)与踏板对比度(C)的函数关系。这些范式产生了截然不同的结果:在脉冲踏板范式中,ΔC 和 C 之间呈线性关系,表明了 P 系统的处理过程;而在稳定踏板范式中,ΔC 和 C 之间呈非线性关系,表明了 M 系统的反应特征。然而,我们最近发现,在使用基于对颜色和空间频率的敏感性而偏向于 M 或 P 系统的 Gabor 刺激时,P 模型比 M 模型更适合这两种范式。在这里,我们在左下方和右上方视野中分别使用了绿光和红光下的两个方形基座,以偏向 M 系统和 P 系统。基于之前的研究结果,我们预测了以下几点:(1) 由于任务要求不同,脉冲基座比稳定基座的ΔC vs. C函数更陡峭;(2) 右上象限比左下象限的ΔC更低,因为它偏向于P系统的处理;(3) 没有颜色的影响,因为两种范式都跟踪P系统;最重要的是(4) 稳定基座的对比度增益不应高于脉冲基座。总的来说,我们的预测得到了证实,复制了我们之前的研究结果,并提供了进一步的证据来质疑使用脉冲基座和稳定基座范式来区分 P 系统和 M 系统的普遍有效性。