Abstract
We examine metacontrast masking with texture-defined second-order stimuli. Our results reveal that (1) the monotonic type A as well as the nonmonotonic (U-shaped) type B metacontrast effect, which has been extensively examined with first-order luminance-defined stimuli, can be obtained with texture-defined second-order stimuli; and (2) while variations of luminance contrast are known to affect the magnitude of metacontrast with first-order stimuli, neither the size nor orientation contrast between texture elements defining the second-order stimuli have a significant impact on the magnitude or shape of metacontrast. These findings bear on theories of metacontrast masking by showing that the mechanism giving rise to nonmonotonic masking effects can operate beyond the level of first-order stimulus processing.
Published Version
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 call