Literature DB >> 20884588

Cortical distance determines whether flankers cause crowding or the tilt illusion.

Isabelle Mareschal1, Michael J Morgan, Joshua A Solomon.   

Abstract

Differences between target and flanker orientations become exaggerated in the tilt illusion. However, small differences sometimes go unnoticed. This small-angle assimilation shares many similarities with other types of visual crowding but is typically found only with small and/or hard-to-see stimuli. In Experiment 1, we investigated the effect of stimulus visibility on orientation bias using relatively large stimuli. The introduction of visual noise increased the perceived similarity of target and flanker orientations at retinal eccentricities of 4° and 10°; however, small-angle assimilation was found only at 10°. The effects of eccentricity were reduced in Experiment 2, when our stimuli were "M-scaled" for equal cortical coverage. Further support for a cortical substrate was obtained in Experiment 3, in which the effects of target-flanker separation were measured. When biases from all three experiments are expressed as a fraction of the inducing flankers' angle, and plotted as a function of the approximate cortical separation between the target and its closest flanker, they form a curve like the cross-section of half a Mexican hat. We conclude that the tilt illusion and small-angle assimilation reflect opponent influences on orientation perception. The strength of each influence increases with cortical proximity and stimulus visibility, but the one responsible for assimilation has a lesser extent.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20884588     DOI: 10.1167/10.8.13

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


  21 in total

1.  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

2.  Substitution and pooling in visual crowding induced by similar and dissimilar distractors.

Authors:  Edward F Ester; Emma Zilber; John T Serences
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  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

4.  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

5.  Crowding and Binding: Not All Feature Dimensions Behave in the Same Way.

Authors:  Amit Yashar; Xiuyun Wu; Jiageng Chen; Marisa Carrasco
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2019-09-18

6.  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

Review 7.  Visual crowding: a fundamental limit on conscious perception and object recognition.

Authors:  David Whitney; Dennis M Levi
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2011-03-21       Impact factor: 20.229

8.  On the rules of integration of crowded orientation signals.

Authors:  Endel Põder
Journal:  Iperception       Date:  2012-07-09

9.  Variability in visual cortex size reflects tradeoff between local orientation sensitivity and global orientation modulation.

Authors:  Chen Song; Dietrich S Schwarzkopf; Geraint Rees
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 14.919

10.  Perception of 3D Slant Out of the Box.

Authors:  Katinka van der Kooij; Susan F Te Pas
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-06-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.