Skip to main content
PMC home page
The Journal of Physiology logoLink to The Journal of Physiology
. 1972 Dec;227(1):313–322. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1972.sp010034

Physiological correlates of adaptation to a rotated visual field

Adriana Fiorentini, C Ghez, L Maffei
PMCID: PMC1331277  PMID: 4646583

Abstract

1. Perceptual adaptation to a 30 or 45° visual tilt was induced in human subjects by means of prismatic spectacles worn for 5-7 days. Relative contrast thresholds and the amplitudes of the occipital potentials to vertical and oblique gratings were studied.

2. During continuous exposure to the tilted visual environment the normal differences between contrast thresholds for vertical and oblique targets decreased or were no longer significant. In all subjects the change from control threshold differences was significant at the 0·005 level.

3. During the course of adaptation the difference in amplitude of the potentials evoked by vertical and oblique oscillating gratings also decreased. The changes with respect to control differences were significant at the 0·005 level in each subject.

4. Intermittent exposure to tilt in one subject resulted only in minor adaptation of the apparent vertical, and the evoked potential differences did not change from control levels.

5. The changes are interpreted as suggesting that plastic changes in the extraretinal mechanism responsive to target orientation occur during adaptation to prismatic tilt.

Full text

PDF
313

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bisti S., Maffei L., Piccolino M. Variations of the visual responses of the superior colliculus in relation to body roll. Science. 1972 Jan 28;175(4020):456–457. doi: 10.1126/science.175.4020.456. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Blakemore C., Cooper G. F. Development of the brain depends on the visual environment. Nature. 1970 Oct 31;228(5270):477–478. doi: 10.1038/228477a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Campbell F. W., Kulikowski J. J., Levinson J. The effect of orientation on the visual resolution of gratings. J Physiol. 1966 Nov;187(2):427–436. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1966.sp008100. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Campbell F. W., Kulikowski J. J. The visual evoked potential as a function of contrast of a grating pattern. J Physiol. 1972 Apr;222(2):345–356. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1972.sp009801. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Campbell F. W., Maffei L. Electrophysiological evidence for the existence of orientation and size detectors in the human visual system. J Physiol. 1970 May;207(3):635–652. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1970.sp009085. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Ebenholtz S. M. Adaptation to a rotated visual field as a function of degree of optical tilt and exposure time. J Exp Psychol. 1966 Nov;72(5):629–634. doi: 10.1037/h0023736. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. HELD R., FREEDMAN S. J. PLASTICITY IN HUMAN SENSORIMOTOR CONTROL. Science. 1963 Oct 25;142(3591):455–462. doi: 10.1126/science.142.3591.455. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Harris C. S. Perceptual adaptation to inverted, reversed, and displaced vision. Psychol Rev. 1965 Nov;72(6):419–444. doi: 10.1037/h0022616. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Hirsch H. V., Spinelli D. N. Modification of the distribution of receptive field orientation in cats by selective visual exposure during development. Exp Brain Res. 1971 Jun 29;12(5):509–527. doi: 10.1007/BF00234246. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Horn G., Hill R. M. Modifications of receptive fields of cells in the visual cortex occurring spontaneously and associated with bodily tilt. Nature. 1969 Jan 11;221(5176):186–188. doi: 10.1038/221186a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Horn G., Stechler G., Hill R. M. Receptive fields of units in the visual cortex of the cat in the presence and absence of bodily tilt. Exp Brain Res. 1972;15(2):113–132. doi: 10.1007/BF00235577. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Hubel D. H., Wiesel T. N. The period of susceptibility to the physiological effects of unilateral eye closure in kittens. J Physiol. 1970 Feb;206(2):419–436. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1970.sp009022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. John E. R., Shimokochi M., Bartlett F. Neural readout from memory during generalization. Science. 1969 Jun 27;164(3887):1534–1536. doi: 10.1126/science.164.3887.1534. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. MIKAELIAN H., HELD R. TWO TYPES OF ADAPTATION TO AN OPTICALLY-ROTATED VISUAL FIELD. Am J Psychol. 1964 Jun;77:257–263. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. MORANT R. B., BELLER H. K. ADAPTATION TO PRISMATICALLY ROTATED VISUAL FIELDS. Science. 1965 Apr 23;148(3669):530–531. doi: 10.1126/science.148.3669.530. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Maffei L., Campbell F. W. Neurophysiological localization of the vertical and horizontal visual coordinates in man. Science. 1970 Jan 23;167(3917):386–387. doi: 10.1126/science.167.3917.386. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. TAYLOR M. M. Visual discrimination and orientation. J Opt Soc Am. 1963 Jun;53:763–765. doi: 10.1364/josa.53.000763. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The Journal of Physiology are provided here courtesy of The Physiological Society

RESOURCES