Citation

Desilva HB, Weber A. J. Exp. Psychol. 1932; 15(4): 399-415.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1932, American Psychological Association)

DOI

10.1037/h0069839

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Subjects were unable to distinguish forms upon the blind spot under the conditions of the investigation. They were never able to see one light stimulus inside of another on the blind spot. This fact indicates that the presence of receptors in the blind spot is doubtful. The totalizing phenomenon seems more important in explaining the filling-in process than presence of receptors in the blind spot. Ophthalmologists have never discovered receptors in the blind spot. Surrounding receptors play a greater part in the totalizing function than does the responsiveness of the optic nerve trunk to light. There is no qualitative difference between a near liminal light on the blind spot and a near liminal light on the fovea. Stimuli falling on the periphery of the blind spot are seen more easily than stimuli falling on the center. Adaptation takes place on the blind spot as it does on the retina proper. The integrative adjacent receptor theory fits the facts of responsiveness of the blind spot better than does the postulation of receptors located within the blind spot. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)