Description2-point orientation discrimination (2POD) compared to traditional two-point discrimination (2PD).jpg
English: From Tong et al (2013) doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00579. (A) Performance on a the traditional two-point discrimination (2PD) task. (B) Performance on the two-point orientation discrimination task (2POD). In both cases, the tests were done with a two-interval forced-choice testing procedure. Note that performance on 2PD is well above chance even at zero mm separation, indicating that 2PD is not a valid measure of tactile spatial acuity. By contrast, performance on 2POD falls to chance level (50% correct) as the point separation approaches zero mm, as expected for a valid measure of spatial acuity.
to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work
to remix – to adapt the work
Under the following conditions:
attribution – You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
share alike – If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same or compatible license as the original.
Please help improve this media file by adding it to one or more categories, so it may be associated with related media files (how?), and so that it can be more easily found.
Please notify the uploader with
{{subst:Please link images|File:2-point orientation discrimination (2POD) compared to traditional two-point discrimination (2PD).jpg}} ~~~~
Captions
Add a one-line explanation of what this file represents