Literature DB >> 23200866

Foveal contour interaction for low contrast acuity targets.

John Siderov1, Sarah J Waugh, Harold E Bedell.   

Abstract

Previous investigators reported the impairment of foveal visual acuity by nearby flanking targets (contour interaction) is reduced or eliminated when acuity is measured using low contrast targets. Unlike earlier studies, we compared contour interaction for high and low contrast acuity targets using flankers at fixed angular separations, rather than at specific multiples of the acuity target's stroke width. Percent correct letter identification was determined in 4 adult observers for computer generated, high and low contrast dark Sloan letters surrounded by 4 equal contrast flanking bars. Two low contrast targets were selected to reduce each observer's visual acuity by 0.2 and 0.4 logMAR. The contour interaction functions measured for high and low contrast letters are very similar when percent correct letter identification is plotted against the flanker separation in min arc. These results indicate that contour interaction of foveal acuity targets occurs within a fixed angular zone of a few min arc, regardless of the size or contrast of the acuity target.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23200866     DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2012.11.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vision Res        ISSN: 0042-6989            Impact factor:   1.886


  12 in total

1.  Mesopic visual acuity is less crowded.

Authors:  František Pluháček; John Siderov
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-05-28       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Contour interaction under photopic and scotopic conditions.

Authors:  Lenka Musilová; František Pluhácek; Stephanie M Marten-Ellis; Harold E Bedell; John Siderov
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  A double dissociation of the acuity and crowding limits to letter identification, and the promise of improved visual screening.

Authors:  Shuang Song; Dennis M Levi; Denis G Pelli
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2014-05-05       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  Contour interaction in foveal vision: a response to Siderov, Waugh, and Bedell (2013).

Authors:  Daniel R Coates; Dennis M Levi
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2013-11-08       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Factors affecting crowded acuity: eccentricity and contrast.

Authors:  Daniel R Coates; Jeremy M Chin; Susana T L Chung
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.973

6.  Global and high-level effects in crowding cannot be predicted by either high-dimensional pooling or target cueing.

Authors:  Alban Bornet; Oh-Hyeon Choung; Adrien Doerig; David Whitney; Michael H Herzog; Mauro Manassi
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 2.240

7.  A Comparison of Foveal and Peripheral Contour Interaction and Crowding.

Authors:  Stephanie M Marten-Ellis; Harold E Bedell
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2021-01-01       Impact factor: 2.106

8.  Uncovering foveal crowding?

Authors:  Maria Lev; Oren Yehezkel; Uri Polat
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2014-02-12       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Foveal Crowding Resolved.

Authors:  Daniel R Coates; Dennis M Levi; Phanith Touch; Ramkumar Sabesan
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-06-15       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 10.  Seven Myths on Crowding and Peripheral Vision.

Authors:  Hans Strasburger
Journal:  Iperception       Date:  2020-05-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.