Literature DB >> 20053091

Dissociable effects of attention and crowding on orientation averaging.

Steven C Dakin1, Peter J Bex, John R Cass, Roger J Watt.   

Abstract

It has been proposed that visual crowding-the breakdown in recognition that occurs when objects are presented in cluttered scenes-reflects a limit imposed by visual attention. We examined this idea in the context of an orientation averaging task, having subjects judge the mean orientation of a set of oriented signal elements either in isolation, or "crowded" by nearby randomly oriented elements. In some conditions, subjects also had to perform an attentionally demanding secondary task. By measuring performance at different levels of signal orientation variability, we show that crowding increases subjects' local uncertainty (about the orientation of individual elements) but that diverting attention reduces their global efficiency (the effective number of elements they can average over). Furthermore, performance with the same stimulus-sequence, presented multiple times, reveals that crowding does not induce more stimulus-independent variability (as would be predicted by some accounts based on attention). We conclude that crowding and attentional load have dissociable perceptual consequences for orientation averaging, suggesting distinct neural mechanisms for both. For the task we examined, attention can modulate the effects of crowding by changing the efficiency with which information is analyzed by the visual system but since crowding changes local uncertainty, not efficiency, crowding does not reflect an attentional limit.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20053091      PMCID: PMC2927104          DOI: 10.1167/9.11.28

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


  47 in total

1.  The spatial resolution of visual attention.

Authors:  J Intriligator; P Cavanagh
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Information limit on the spatial integration of local orientation signals.

Authors:  S C Dakin
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 2.129

3.  Process decomposition from double dissociation of subprocesses.

Authors:  Saul Sternberg
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 4.027

4.  Contrasting effects of sensory limits and capacity limits in visual selective attention.

Authors:  Nilli Lavie; Jan W de Fockert
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2003-02

5.  The shape and size of crowding for moving targets.

Authors:  Peter J Bex; Steven C Dakin; Anita J Simmers
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  The extent of crowding in peripheral vision does not scale with target size.

Authors:  Srimant P Tripathy; Patrick Cavanagh
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 1.886

7.  An fMRI of sustained attention with endogenous and exogenous engagement.

Authors:  C O'Connor; T Manly; I H Robertson; S J Hevenor; B Levine
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 2.310

8.  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

9.  Interaction effects in parafoveal letter recognition.

Authors:  H Bouma
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1970-04-11       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  Detection of auditory signals in reproducible noise.

Authors:  S M Pfafflin; M V Mathews
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1966-02       Impact factor: 1.840

View more
  28 in total

1.  Stereoacuity in the periphery is limited by internal noise.

Authors:  Susan G Wardle; Peter J Bex; John Cass; David Alais
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2012-06-08       Impact factor: 2.240

2.  Object-level visual information gets through the bottleneck of crowding.

Authors:  Jason Fischer; David Whitney
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Crowding is tuned for perceived (not physical) location.

Authors:  Steven C Dakin; John A Greenwood; Thomas A Carlson; Peter J Bex
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2011-08-08       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  Macaque monkeys experience visual crowding.

Authors:  Erin A Crowder; Carl R Olson
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  Allocation of attention during pursuit of large objects is no different than during fixation.

Authors:  Scott N J Watamaniuk; Stephen J Heinen
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.240

6.  Set size and ensemble perception of numerical value.

Authors:  Kassandra R Lee; Taylor D Dague; Kenith V Sobel; Nickolas J Paternoster; Amrita M Puri
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-01-03       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Perceiving crowd attention: ensemble perception of a crowd's gaze.

Authors:  Timothy D Sweeny; David Whitney
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2014-08-14

8.  Nonspecific competition underlies transient attention.

Authors:  Anna Wilschut; Jan Theeuwes; Christian N L Olivers
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2014-09-04

9.  Crowding changes appearance.

Authors:  John A Greenwood; Peter J Bex; Steven C Dakin
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2010-03-04       Impact factor: 10.834

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.