PURPOSE: Crowding describes the increased difficulty in identifying a target object when it is surrounded by nearby objects (flankers). A recent study investigated the effect of age on visual crowding and found equivocal results: Although crowded visual acuity was worse in older participants, crowding expressed as a ratio did not change with age. However, the spatial extent of crowding is a better index of crowding effects and remains unknown. In the present study, we used established psychophysical methods to characterize the effect of age on visual crowding (magnitude and extent) in a letter recognition task. METHODS: Letter recognition thresholds were determined for three different flanker separations in 54 adults (aged 18-76 years) with normal vision. Additionally, the spatial extent of crowding was established by measuring spacing thresholds: the flanker-to-target separation required to produce a given reduction in performance. Uncrowded visual acuity, crowded visual acuity, and spacing thresholds were expressed as a function of age, avoiding arbitrary categorization of young and old participants. RESULTS: Our results showed that uncrowded and crowded visual acuities do not change significantly as a function of age. Furthermore, spacing thresholds did not change with age and approximated Bouma's law (half eccentricity). CONCLUSIONS: These data show that crowding in adults is unaffected by senescence and provide additional evidence for distinct neural mechanisms mediating surround suppression and visual crowding, since the former shows a significant age effect. Finally, our data suggest that the well-documented age-related decline in peripheral reading ability is not due to age-related changes in visual crowding. Copyright 2014 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
PURPOSE: Crowding describes the increased difficulty in identifying a target object when it is surrounded by nearby objects (flankers). A recent study investigated the effect of age on visual crowding and found equivocal results: Although crowded visual acuity was worse in older participants, crowding expressed as a ratio did not change with age. However, the spatial extent of crowding is a better index of crowding effects and remains unknown. In the present study, we used established psychophysical methods to characterize the effect of age on visual crowding (magnitude and extent) in a letter recognition task. METHODS: Letter recognition thresholds were determined for three different flanker separations in 54 adults (aged 18-76 years) with normal vision. Additionally, the spatial extent of crowding was established by measuring spacing thresholds: the flanker-to-target separation required to produce a given reduction in performance. Uncrowded visual acuity, crowded visual acuity, and spacing thresholds were expressed as a function of age, avoiding arbitrary categorization of young and old participants. RESULTS: Our results showed that uncrowded and crowded visual acuities do not change significantly as a function of age. Furthermore, spacing thresholds did not change with age and approximated Bouma's law (half eccentricity). CONCLUSIONS: These data show that crowding in adults is unaffected by senescence and provide additional evidence for distinct neural mechanisms mediating surround suppression and visual crowding, since the former shows a significant age effect. Finally, our data suggest that the well-documented age-related decline in peripheral reading ability is not due to age-related changes in visual crowding. Copyright 2014 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
Authors: Bianca Huurneman; F Nienke Boonstra; Ralf Fa Cox; Antonius Hn Cillessen; Ger van Rens Journal: BMC Ophthalmol Date: 2012-07-23 Impact factor: 2.209
Authors: Nara G Ogata; Erwin R Boer; Fábio B Daga; Alessandro A Jammal; James M Stringham; Felipe A Medeiros Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Karlijn Woutersen; Albert V van den Berg; F Nienke Boonstra; Thomas Theelen; Jeroen Goossens Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-05-01 Impact factor: 3.240