Literature DB >> 33393963

Asymmetries in visual acuity around the visual field.

Antoine Barbot1,2,3,4, Shutian Xue1,5, Marisa Carrasco1,2,6.   

Abstract

Human vision is heterogeneous around the visual field. At a fixed eccentricity, performance is better along the horizontal than the vertical meridian and along the lower than the upper vertical meridian. These asymmetric patterns, termed performance fields, have been found in numerous visual tasks, including those mediated by contrast sensitivity and spatial resolution. However, it is unknown whether spatial resolution asymmetries are confined to the cardinal meridians or whether and how far they extend into the upper and lower hemifields. Here, we measured visual acuity at isoeccentric peripheral locations (10 deg eccentricity), every 15° of polar angle. On each trial, observers judged the orientation (± 45°) of one of four equidistant, suprathreshold grating stimuli varying in spatial frequency (SF). On each block, we measured performance as a function of stimulus SF at 4 of 24 isoeccentric locations. We estimated the 75%-correct SF threshold, SF cutoff point (i.e., chance-level), and slope of the psychometric function for each location. We found higher SF estimates (i.e., better acuity) for the horizontal than the vertical meridian and for the lower than the upper vertical meridian. These asymmetries were most pronounced at the cardinal meridians and decreased gradually as the angular distance from the vertical meridian increased. This gradual change in acuity with polar angle reflected a shift of the psychometric function without changes in slope. The same pattern was found under binocular and monocular viewing conditions. These findings advance our understanding of visual processing around the visual field and help constrain models of visual perception.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33393963      PMCID: PMC7794272          DOI: 10.1167/jov.21.1.2

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


  106 in total

Review 1.  How Attention Affects Spatial Resolution.

Authors:  Marisa Carrasco; Antoine Barbot
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol       Date:  2015-05-06

2.  Retina-V1 model of detectability across the visual field.

Authors:  Chris Bradley; Jared Abrams; Wilson S Geisler
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2014-10-21       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  Distinct lower visual field preference for object shape.

Authors:  Gunnar Schmidtmann; Andrew J Logan; Graeme J Kennedy; Gael E Gordon; Gunter Loffler
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  An estimation and application of the human cortical magnification factor.

Authors:  J Rovamo; V Virsu
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1979       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Visual resolution, contrast sensitivity, and the cortical magnification factor.

Authors:  V Virsu; J Rovamo
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1979       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Enhanced perception of illusory contours in the lower versus upper visual hemifields.

Authors:  N Rubin; K Nakayama; R Shapley
Journal:  Science       Date:  1996-02-02       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  The importance of sustained attention for patients with maculopathies.

Authors:  E Altpeter; M Mackeben; S Trauzettel-Klosinski
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Human photoreceptor topography.

Authors:  C A Curcio; K R Sloan; R E Kalina; A E Hendrickson
Journal:  J Comp Neurol       Date:  1990-02-22       Impact factor: 3.215

9.  Stereopsis is adaptive for the natural environment.

Authors:  William W Sprague; Emily A Cooper; Ivana Tošić; Martin S Banks
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 14.136

10.  Feature singletons attract spatial attention independently of feature priming.

Authors:  Amit Yashar; Alex L White; Wanghaoming Fang; Marisa Carrasco
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 2.240

View more
  10 in total

1.  Visual field asymmetries vary between children and adults.

Authors:  Marisa Carrasco; Mariel Roberts; Caroline Myers; Lavanya Shukla
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2022-06-06       Impact factor: 10.900

2.  Visual field asymmetries in numerosity processing.

Authors:  Ramakrishna Chakravarthi; Danai Papadaki; Jan Krajnik
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2022-10-18       Impact factor: 2.157

3.  Linking individual differences in human primary visual cortex to contrast sensitivity around the visual field.

Authors:  Jonathan Winawer; Marisa Carrasco; Marc M Himmelberg
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-06-13       Impact factor: 17.694

4.  Asymmetries around the visual field: From retina to cortex to behavior.

Authors:  Eline R Kupers; Noah C Benson; Marisa Carrasco; Jonathan Winawer
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2022-01-10       Impact factor: 4.475

5.  Characterizing the in-out asymmetry in visual crowding.

Authors:  Ramakrishna Chakravarthi; Jirko Rubruck; Nikki Kipling; Alasdair D F Clarke
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2021-10-05       Impact factor: 2.240

6.  Presaccadic attention enhances contrast sensitivity, but not at the upper vertical meridian.

Authors:  Nina M Hanning; Marc M Himmelberg; Marisa Carrasco
Journal:  iScience       Date:  2022-02-01

7.  Mapping spatial frequency preferences across human primary visual cortex.

Authors:  William F Broderick; Eero P Simoncelli; Jonathan Winawer
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 2.240

8.  Atypical visual field asymmetries in redundancy masking.

Authors:  Fazilet Zeynep Yildirim; Daniel R Coates; Bilge Sayim
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2022-04-06       Impact factor: 2.004

9.  Cross-dataset reproducibility of human retinotopic maps.

Authors:  Marc M Himmelberg; Jan W Kurzawski; Noah C Benson; Denis G Pelli; Marisa Carrasco; Jonathan Winawer
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2021-09-25       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  Simultaneous modeling of reaction times and brain dynamics in a spatial cueing task.

Authors:  Simon R Steinkamp; Gereon R Fink; Simone Vossel; Ralph Weidner
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2021-12-24       Impact factor: 5.038

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.