Cargando…

Substitution and pooling in crowding

Unless we fixate directly on it, it is hard to see an object among other objects. This breakdown in object recognition, called crowding, severely limits peripheral vision. The effect is more severe when objects are more similar. When observers mistake the identity of a target among flanker objects,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Freeman, Jeremy, Chakravarthi, Ramakrishna, Pelli, Denis G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3283763/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22160819
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-011-0229-0
_version_ 1782224254005149696
author Freeman, Jeremy
Chakravarthi, Ramakrishna
Pelli, Denis G.
author_facet Freeman, Jeremy
Chakravarthi, Ramakrishna
Pelli, Denis G.
author_sort Freeman, Jeremy
collection PubMed
description Unless we fixate directly on it, it is hard to see an object among other objects. This breakdown in object recognition, called crowding, severely limits peripheral vision. The effect is more severe when objects are more similar. When observers mistake the identity of a target among flanker objects, they often report a flanker. Many have taken these flanker reports as evidence of internal substitution of the target by a flanker. Here, we ask observers to identify a target letter presented in between one similar and one dissimilar flanker letter. Simple substitution takes in only one letter, which is often the target but, by unwitting mistake, is sometimes a flanker. The opposite of substitution is pooling, which takes in more than one letter. Having taken only one letter, the substitution process knows only its identity, not its similarity to the target. Thus, it must report similar and dissimilar flankers equally often. Contrary to this prediction, the similar flanker is reported much more often than the dissimilar flanker, showing that rampant flanker substitution cannot account for most flanker reports. Mixture modeling shows that simple substitution can account for, at most, about half the trials. Pooling and nonpooling (simple substitution) together include all possible models of crowding. When observers are asked to identify a crowded object, at least half of their reports are pooled, based on a combination of information from target and flankers, rather than being based on a single letter. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.3758/s13414-011-0229-0) contains supplementary material.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3283763
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32837632012-03-01 Substitution and pooling in crowding Freeman, Jeremy Chakravarthi, Ramakrishna Pelli, Denis G. Atten Percept Psychophys Article Unless we fixate directly on it, it is hard to see an object among other objects. This breakdown in object recognition, called crowding, severely limits peripheral vision. The effect is more severe when objects are more similar. When observers mistake the identity of a target among flanker objects, they often report a flanker. Many have taken these flanker reports as evidence of internal substitution of the target by a flanker. Here, we ask observers to identify a target letter presented in between one similar and one dissimilar flanker letter. Simple substitution takes in only one letter, which is often the target but, by unwitting mistake, is sometimes a flanker. The opposite of substitution is pooling, which takes in more than one letter. Having taken only one letter, the substitution process knows only its identity, not its similarity to the target. Thus, it must report similar and dissimilar flankers equally often. Contrary to this prediction, the similar flanker is reported much more often than the dissimilar flanker, showing that rampant flanker substitution cannot account for most flanker reports. Mixture modeling shows that simple substitution can account for, at most, about half the trials. Pooling and nonpooling (simple substitution) together include all possible models of crowding. When observers are asked to identify a crowded object, at least half of their reports are pooled, based on a combination of information from target and flankers, rather than being based on a single letter. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.3758/s13414-011-0229-0) contains supplementary material. Springer-Verlag 2011-12-09 2012 /pmc/articles/PMC3283763/ /pubmed/22160819 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-011-0229-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2011 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Article
Freeman, Jeremy
Chakravarthi, Ramakrishna
Pelli, Denis G.
Substitution and pooling in crowding
title Substitution and pooling in crowding
title_full Substitution and pooling in crowding
title_fullStr Substitution and pooling in crowding
title_full_unstemmed Substitution and pooling in crowding
title_short Substitution and pooling in crowding
title_sort substitution and pooling in crowding
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3283763/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22160819
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-011-0229-0
work_keys_str_mv AT freemanjeremy substitutionandpoolingincrowding
AT chakravarthiramakrishna substitutionandpoolingincrowding
AT pellidenisg substitutionandpoolingincrowding