Abstract
Recent studies highlight the importance of the temporal domain in visual processing. Critical Flicker-Fusion Frequency (CFF), the frequency at which a flickering light is perceived as continuous, is widely used for evaluating visual temporal processing. However, substantial variability in the psychophysical paradigms, used for measuring CFF, leads to substantial variability in the reported results. Here, we report on a comprehensive comparison of CFF measurements through three different psychophysical paradigms: methods of limits; method of constant stimuli, and staircase method. Our results demonstrate that the CFF can be reliably measured with high repeatability by all three psychophysics methods. However, correlations (r = 0.92, p≪0.001) and agreement (Bland Altman test indicated 95% confidence limit variation of ±3.6 Hz), were highest between the staircase and the constant stimuli methods. The time required to complete the test was significantly longer for the constant stimuli method as compared to other methods (p < 0.001). Our results highlight the suitability of the adaptive paradigm for efficiently measuring temporal resolution in the visual system.
Highlights
Recent studies[12,13,14] have demonstrated the importance of the temporal domain in visual processing and highlighted the complex space-time interplay
In addition to differences in the psychophysical paradigm used for measuring Critical FlickerFusion Frequency (CFF) in various reports, there is a lack of consistency with regards to the various stimuli parameters used for CFF measurements, such as stimuli light intensity, size and color[19,25,30,31,44,46,47,48,52,53,54,63,64,65], adding more ambiguity to the results published in literature and making the comparison between the various methods difficult
We present a comprehensive comparison between three methods for measuring CFF threshold in the aim to single out the most time efficient, reliable and repeatable method
Summary
Recent studies[12,13,14] have demonstrated the importance of the temporal domain in visual processing and highlighted the complex space-time interplay. There are several major psychophysical paradigms[36,37,38,39] widely used for measuring various sensory thresholds (e.g. vernier acuity[40] and contrast sensitivity[41] in vision, or auditory sensitivity38) with the widely used method of constant stimuli (MCS) being the most accurate of these methods[42] This method is based on presenting the stimuli in a random order and reduces errors caused by habituation and www.nature.com/scientificreports/. In addition to differences in the psychophysical paradigm used for measuring CFF in various reports, there is a lack of consistency with regards to the various stimuli parameters used for CFF measurements, such as stimuli light intensity, size and color[19,25,30,31,44,46,47,48,52,53,54,63,64,65], adding more ambiguity to the results published in literature and making the comparison between the various methods difficult
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
