Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 4, 2026

Using Looming Visual Stimuli to Evaluate Mouse Vision
Published on: June 13, 2019
Why is second-order vision less efficient than first-order vision?
Velitchko Manahilov1, William A Simpson, Julie Calvert
1Department of Vision Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow G4 0BA, UK. vma@gcal.ac.uk
Abstract:
Research has shown that the sensitivity to second-order modulations of carrier contrast is lower than that to first-order luminance modulations stimuli. We sought to compare the efficiency of processing first- and second-order information. Employing a phase-discrimination paradigm we found that when humans were given sufficient a priori information of signal parameters they detected both luminance and contrast modulations of 0.6 and 2c/deg by a phase-sensitive algorithm. The overall detection efficiency for second-order patterns, however, was lower that that for first-order stimuli. To study the factors which limit the efficiency of first- and second-order vision, we measured detection performance for luminance and contrast modulations of 0.6 and 2c/deg embedded in Gaussian noise. The results showed that the detection of second-order patterns had lower sampling efficiency and higher additive internal noise as compared to the detection of first-order stimuli. Classification images for detecting contrast modulations of 2c/deg resembled the side-band component of the contrast modulations which suggests that human observers may detect contrast modulations of a sinusoidal carrier using first-order luminance channels. The lower sensitivity of the mechanism detecting second-order patterns might be due to higher levels of additive internal noise and lower sampling efficiency than those of the mechanism analysing first-order patterns.
Related Concept Videos
Vision
Anatomy of the Eyeball
Photoreceptors and Visual Pathways
Visual System
Once through the pupil, the light passes through the lens, a...
Color Vision
Parallel Processing

