CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 111Visual perception and processing mechanismsNeural dynamics and brain functionMultisensory perception and integration

Adaptation from invisible flicker

Open access
Shady, Sherif, MacLeod, Donald I. A., Fisher, Heidi S.·2004·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
DOI 10.1073/pnas.0303452101PMC PMC387392
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Human ability to resolve temporal variation, or flicker, in the luminance (brightness) or chromaticity (color) of an image declines with increasing frequency and is limited, within the central visual field, to a critical flicker frequency of approximately 50 and 25 Hz, respectively. Much remains unknown about the neural filtering that underlies this frequency-dependent attenuation of flicker sensitivity, most notably the number of filtering stages involved and their neural loci. Here we use the process of flicker adaptation, by which an observer's flicker sensitivity is attenuated after prolonged exposure to flickering lights, as a functional landmark. We show that flicker adaptation is more sensitive to high temporal frequencies than is conscious perception and that prolonged exposure to invisible flicker of either luminance or chromaticity, at frequencies above the respective critical flicker frequency, can compromise our visual sensitivity. This suggests that multiple filtering stages, distributed across retinal and cortical loci that straddle the locus for flicker adaptation, are involved in the neural filtering of high temporal frequencies by the human visual system.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0303452101

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The preferred frequency of secondary visual areas is just below the CFF for chromatic flickering (~25 Hz) and luminance flickering (~50 Hz).

    “Interestingly, the preferred frequency of secondary visual areas is just below the CFF for chromatic flickering (~25 Hz) and luminance flickering (~50 Hz) (Shady et al., 2004).”

    From Perception is associated with the brain’s metabolic response to sensory stimulation (2022) · cites this paper as Shady et al., 2004

    The Abstract gives CFFs of approximately 25 Hz for chromatic flicker and 50 Hz for luminance flicker. It does not say that secondary visual areas prefer frequencies just below those limits; its frequency-dependent measurements concern flicker perception and adaptation, not the preferred frequencies of secondary visual areas. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The isoluminant chromatic flickering stimulation at 30 Hz is above the CFF.

    “In our experiments, the isoluminant chromatic flickering stimulation at 30 Hz is above the CFF”

    From Perception is associated with the brain’s metabolic response to sensory stimulation (2022) · cites this paper as Shady et al., 2004

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. [1]de Lange, H. (1958) J. Opt. Soc. Am. 48, 771-783. [Google Scholar]
  2. [3]Matin, L. (1968) J. Opt. Soc. Am. 58, 404-415. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. [4]Kelly, D. H. (1971) J. Opt. Soc. Am. 61, 537-546. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. [5]Van der Tweel, L. H. (1963) Doc. Ophthalmol. 18, 287-304. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. [6]Regan, D. (1968) Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 25, 231-237. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. [7]Regan, D. & Beverley, K. I. (1973) Perception 2, 61-65. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. [8]Burns, S. A., Elsner, A. E. & Kreitz, M. R. (1992) Optom. Vis. Sci. 69, 95-105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. [9]Wu, S., Burns, S. A. & Elsner, A. E. (1995) Vision Res. 35, 2943-2953. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. [10]Granit, R. A. & von Ammon, W. (1930) Am. J. Physiol. 95, 229-241. [Google Scholar]
  10. [11]Ginsburg, N. (1966) Am. J. Psychol. 79, 296-300. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. [12]Pantle, A. (1971) Vision Res. 11, 943-952. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. [13]Smith, R. A., Jr. (1971) J. Physiol. (London) 216, 531-552. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. [14]Kelly, D. H. (1972) Vision Res. 12, 89-101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. [15]Krauskopf, J. (1976) in Information Processes in Visual System: Proceedings of the IVth Symposium on Sensory System Physiology, ed. Gilezer, V.D. (Leningrad, Russia), p. 234.
  15. [16]Jameson, D., Hurvich, L. M. & Varner, F. D. (1979) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci USA. 76, 3034-3038. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. [17]Krauskopf, J., Williams, D. R. & Heeley, D. W. (1982) Vision Res. 22, 1123-1131. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. [18]Benzschawel, T. & Guth, S. L. (1982) Vision Res. 22, 69-76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. [19]Lorenceau, J. (1987) Vision Res. 27, 2185-2191. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. [20]Schieting, S. & Spillmann, L. (1987) Vision Res. 27, 277-284. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. [21]Webster, M. A. & Mollon, J. D. (1994) Vision Res. 34, 1993-2020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. [22]Anstis, S. (1996) Vision Res. 36, 3479-3485. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. [23]Movshon, J. A. & Lennie, P. (1979) Nature 278, 850-852. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. [24]Chander, D. & Chichilnisky, E. J. (2001) J. Neurosci. 21, 9904-9916. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. [25]Mandler, M. B. & Makous, W. (1984) Vision Res. 24, 1881-1887. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. [26]Hammett, S. T. & Smith, A. T. (1992) Vision Res. 32, 285-291. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Shady, S., MacLeod, D. I. A., & Fisher, H. S.
Affiliations
University of California San Diego (US)
ORCID
Fisher, Heidi S.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Publisher
National Academy of Sciences
Published
2004-03-29
Volume
101
Issue
14
Pages
5170-5173
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
DOI
10.1073/pnas.0303452101
PMC
PMC387392
OpenAlex
W2160565314
Cited by
111
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
FWCI
1.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Eye Institute (R01EY001711, EY01711)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
Keywords
flicker adaptation, critical flicker frequency, luminance flicker, conscious perception, visual sensitivity, temporal resolution
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Humans, Light

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review