Effect of Pixel Height,Display Height,and Vertical Resolution on the Detection of a Simple Vertical Line Signal in Visual Noise

Abstract

Spatial resolution is one of the parameters that engineers designing digital displays must consider. Three experiments are described that investigate the effects of vertical spatial resolution and the interrelated parameters, pixel height and display height, on the visibility of straight vertical line signals in visual noise. A signal detection analysis of the results showed that detection efficiency was unaffected by vertical resolution and pixel height, whereas an increase in display/signal height resulted in a decline in efficiency. The decline is attributed to the increasing difficulty the visual system encounters when integrating luminance over an increasing spatial extent. It is suggested that in practical digital displays of the kind described here, pixels should be as short as possible in order that the available display information be compressed into the smallest possible height.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barlow, H. B. (1978). The efficiency of detecting changes of density in random dot patterns. Vision Research, 18, 637–650.

Barlow, H. B. , and Reeves, B. C. (1979). The versatility and absolute efficiency of detecting mirror symmetry in random dot displays. Vision Research, 19, 783–793.

Burgess, A. E. , and Ghandeharian, H. (1984). Visual signal detection. II. Signal-location identification. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 1, 906–910.

Burgess, A. E. , Jennings, R. J. , and Wagner, R. F. (1982). Statistical efficiency: A measure of human visual signal-detection performance. Journal of Applied Photographic Engineering, 8, 76–78.

Burton, G. J. , and Ruddock, K. H. (1978). Visual adaptation to patterns containing two-dimensional spatial structure. Vision Research, 18, 93–99.

Cohn, T. E. , and Lasley, D. J. (1974) Spatial summation of foveal increments and decrements. Vision Research, 15, 389–399.

De Valois, R. L. , and De Valois, K. K. (1980). Spatial vision. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 309–341.

Green, D. M. , and Swets, J. A. (1971). Signal detection and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.

Hubel, D. H. , and Wiesel, T. N. (1962). Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat's visual cortex. Journal of Physiology, London, 160, 106–154.

10.

Hubel, D. H. , and Wiesel, T. N. (1965). Receptive fields and functional architecture in two non-striate visual areas (18 and 19) of the cat. Journal of Neurophysiology, 28, 229–289.

11.

Julesz, B. , and Schumer, R. A. (1981). Early visual perception. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 575–627.

12.

Kato, H. , Bishop, P.O. , and Orban, G. A. (1978). Hyper-complex and simple/complex cell classification in cat striate cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology, 41, 1071–1095.

13.

Kingdom, F. , and Moulden, B. (1986). Digitized images: What type of grey scale should one use?? Perception, 15, 17–25.

14.

Moulden, B. , and Kingdom, F. (1987). Effect of the number of grey levels on the detectability of a simple line signal in visual noise. Spatial Vision, 2, 61–77.

15.

Moulden, B., and Kingdom, F. (1987a). Effect of pixel width, display width, and number of alternative signal locations on the detection of a simple line signal in visual noise. Manuscript submitted for publication.

16.

Nakayama, K. , and Roberts, D. J. (1972). Line-length detectors in the human visual system: Evidence from selective adaptation. Vision Research, 12, 1709–1713.

17.

Rose, D. (1979). Mechanisms underlying the receptive field properties of neurons in cat visual cortex. Vision Research, 19, 533–544.

18.

Sullivan, G. D. (1983). Perceptual filters. In O. J. Braddick and A. C. Sleigh (Eds.), Physical and biological processing of images (pp. 115–126). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

19.

Swets, J. A. , and Birdsall, T. G. (1978). Repeated observation of an uncertain signal. Perception and Psychophysics, 23, 269–274.