Literature DB >> 15330717

Crowding and the tilt illusion: toward a unified account.

Joshua A Solomon1, Fatima M Felisberti, Michael J Morgan.   

Abstract

Crowding, the difficult identification of peripherally viewed targets amidst similar distractors, has been explained as a compulsory pooling of target and distractor features. The tilt illusion, in which the difference between two adjacent gratings' orientations is exaggerated, has also been explained by pooling (of Mexican-hat-shaped population responses). In an attempt to establish both phenomena with the same stimuli--and account for them with the same model--we asked observers to identify (as clockwise or anticlockwise of vertical) slightly tilted targets surrounded by tilted distractors. Our results are inconsistent with the feature-pooling model: the ratio of assimilation (the tendency to perceive vertical targets as tilted in the same direction as slightly tilted distractors) to repulsion (the tendency to perceive vertical targets as tilted away from more oblique distractors) was too small. Instead, a general model of modulatory lateral interaction can better fit our results.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15330717     DOI: 10.1167/4.6.9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vis        ISSN: 1534-7362            Impact factor:   2.240


  22 in total

1.  Dynamics of unconscious contextual effects in orientation processing.

Authors:  Isabelle Mareschal; Colin W G Clifford
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-04-23       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Adaptive coding is constrained to midline locations in a spatial listening task.

Authors:  J K Maier; P Hehrmann; N S Harper; G M Klump; D Pressnitzer; D McAlpine
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-07-05       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Crowding is directed to the fovea and preserves only feature contrast.

Authors:  Yury Petrov; Ariella V Popple
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2007-03-06       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  Segmentation decreases the magnitude of the tilt illusion.

Authors:  Cheng Qiu; Daniel Kersten; Cheryl A Olman
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  Positional averaging explains crowding with letter-like stimuli.

Authors:  John A Greenwood; Peter J Bex; Steven C Dakin
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-07-16       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Crowding follows the binding of relative position and orientation.

Authors:  John A Greenwood; Peter J Bex; Steven C Dakin
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2012-03-21       Impact factor: 2.240

7.  Dissociable effects of visual crowding on the perception of color and motion.

Authors:  John A Greenwood; Michael J Parsons
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-03-19       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Visual crowding cannot be wholly explained by feature pooling.

Authors:  Edward F Ester; Daniel Klee; Edward Awh
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2013-12-23       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Biases and sensitivities in the Poggendorff effect when driven by subjective contours.

Authors:  Marc S Tibber; Dean R Melmoth; Michael J Morgan
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 4.799

10.  A 'dipper' function for texture discrimination based on orientation variance.

Authors:  Michael Morgan; Charles Chubb; Joshua A Solomon
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2008-08-22       Impact factor: 2.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.