Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Functional Relation between Stimulus Intensity and Photically Evoked Cerebral Responses in Man

Abstract

IT has been demonstrated in several laboratories1–5 that estimates of subjective brightness increase in approximate proportion to the cube root of stimulus intensity under conditions of dark adaptation for stimuli of varied area, duration and spectral composition. Liang and Pieron6 present evidence that the latency of visual perception decreases with increasing luminance as the inverse of this power function. Thus, ψb = c/(tt0) = k(LL0)0.33, where ψb = subjective brightness judged by magnitude estimation; t = perceptual latency; t0 = limit of perceptual latency at maximum luminance; L = luminance; L0 = threshold luminance; c and k = constants.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hanes, R. M., J. Exp. Psychol., 39, 719 (1949).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hopkinson, R. G., Nature, 178, 1065 (1956).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  3. Stevens, J. C., and Stevens, S. S., J. Opt. Soc. Amer., 53, 375 (1963).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Onley, J. W., J. Opt. Soc. Amer., 51, 667 (1961).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ekman, G., Eisler, H., and Künnapas, T., Scand. J. Psychol., 1, 41 (1960).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Liang, T., and Pieron, H., Ann. Psychol., 43, 1 (1947).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Rayport, M., Vaughan, H. G., and Rosengart, C. L., Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol. (in the press).

  8. Vaughan, H. G., and Gross, C. G. (unpublished observations).

  9. Tepas, D. I., and Armington, J. C., Vision Res., 2, 449 (1962).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Clynes, M., Kohn, M., and Lifshitz, K., Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 112, 468 (1964).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Diamond, S. P., Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 112, 160 (1964).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Crozier, W. J., Wolf, E., and Zerrahn-Wolf, C., J. Gen. Physiol., 21, 203 (1937).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Raab, D. H., Science, 135, 42 (1962).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

VAUGHAN, H., HULL, R. Functional Relation between Stimulus Intensity and Photically Evoked Cerebral Responses in Man. Nature 206, 720–722 (1965). https://doi.org/10.1038/206720a0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/206720a0

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing