The increasing brightness of white light perceived at constant luminance in the course of dark-adaptation was measured by means of a direct psychophysical scaling method. The same trend was found for all 6 luminance levels of the experiment. It could be characterized as composed of two functions, both growing at a decelerated rate and intersecting at about 8 min. A further analysis revealed that the empirical trend could be represented by the sum of two logarithmic functions of time.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrinkG.van den. Subjective brightness during dark-adaptation. Vision Res., 1962, 2, 495–502.
2.
CraikK. J. W.The effect of adaptation on subjective brightness. Proc. Roy. Soc. (London), 1940, B128, 232–247.
3.
EkmanG.Two generalized ratio scaling methods. J. Psychol., 1958, 45, 287–295.
4.
EkmanG.Temporal integration of brightness. Vision Res., 1966, 6, in press.
5.
EkmanG., BbrglundB., & BerglundU.Loudness as a function of the duration of auditory stimulation. Scand. J. Psychol., 1966, 7, 201–208.
6.
EkmanG., BerglundB., BerglundU., & LindvallT.Perceived intensity of odor as a function of adaptation time. Rep. Psychol. Lab., Univer. Stockholm, 1966, No. 221.
7.
EkmanG., FrankenhaeuserM., LevanderS., & MellisI.The influence of intensity and duration of electrical stimulation on subjective variables. Scand. J. Psychol., 1966, 7, 58–64.
8.
EkmanG., & KuennapasT.Brightness of monochromatic light in scotopic and pho-topic vision. J. Psychol., 1962, 53, 319–327.
9.
GrantD. A., & MoteF. A.Effect of brief flashes of light upon the course of dark-adaptation. J. exp. Psychol., 1949, 39, 610–616.
10.
HechtS., HaigC, & ChaseA. M.The influence of light adaptation on subsequent dark adaptation of the eye. J. gen. Physiol., 1937, 20, 831.
11.
HechtS., HaigC, & WaldG.Dark adaptation of retinal fields of different size and location. J. gen. Physiol., 1935, 19, 321–337.
12.
HechtS., & ShlaerS.An adaptometer for measuring human dark adaptation. J. Opt. Soc. Amer., 1938, 28, 269–275.
13.
LeveltW. J. M.On binocular rivalry. Doctoral thesis, Institute for Perception Rvo-Tno, Soesterberg (Netherlands), 1965.
14.
MitchellR. T., & LiandanskyL. H.Effect of differential adaptation of the eyes upon threshold sensitivity. J. Opt. Soc. Amer., 1955, 45, 831–834.
15.
MoteF. A.Variability of measurements of human dark adaptation. J. Opt. Soc. Amer., 1955, 45, 7–12.
16.
OnleyJ. W.Light adaptation and the brightness of brief foveal stimuli. J. Opt. Soc. Amer., 1961, 51, 667–673.
17.
PittF. H. G.The effect of adaptation and contrast on apparent brightness. Proc. Phys. Soc. (London), 1939, 51, 817–830.
18.
StevensS. S.On the psychophysical law. Psychol. Rev., 1957, 64, 153–181.
19.
StevensS. S., & StevensJ. C.Brightness function: parametric effects of adaptation and contrast. J. Opt. Soc. Amer., 1960, 50, 1139. (a)
