Contrast polarity differences reduce crowding but do not benefit reading performance in peripheral vision.
Previous studies have shown that the spatial extent of crowding in peripheral vision is reduced when a target letter and its flanking letters have opposite contrast polarity. We have examined if this reduction in crowding leads to improved reading performance. We compared the spatial extent of crowding, visual-span profiles (plots of letter-recognition accuracy versus letter position), and reading speed at 10 degrees inferior visual field, using white letters, black letters, or mixtures of white and black letters, presented on a mid-gray background. Consistent with previous studies, the spatial extent of crowding was reduced when the target and flanking letters had opposite contrast polarity. However, using mixed contrast polarity did not lead to improvements in visual-span profiles or reading speed.
Chung
Susana T L
ST
School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA. s.chung@berkeley.edu
Mansfield
J Stephen
JS
D000328:Adult; D015350:Contrast Sensitivity / Q000502:physiology*; D005364:Field Dependence-Independence; D006801:Humans; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual / Q000502:physiology*; D010775:Photic Stimulation / Q000379:methods; D011594:Psychometrics; D011601:Psychophysics; D011932:Reading; D014794:Visual Fields / Q000502:physiology*; D055815:Young Adult
Vision Res. 2001 Mar;41(6):725-43
11248262
J Vis. 2002;2(2):167-77
12678590
J Vis. 2007 Nov 26;7(2):24.1-11
18217839
Vision Res. 1992 Jul;32(7):1349-57
1455707
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1996 Jul;37(8):1492-501
8675391
J Vis. 2004 Dec 30;4(12):1136-69
15669917
Vision Res. 1975 Oct;15:1137-41
1166614
Vision Res. 2000;40(9):1059-67
10738065
Vision Res. 2009 Jul;49(15):1948-60
19460396
Vision Res. 1993 Mar;33(4):539-52
8503200
Vision Res. 2001 Jun;41(14):1833-50
11369047
Vision Res. 2008 Feb;48(5):635-54
18226828
Nature. 1996 Sep 26;383(6598):334-7
8848045
Vision Res. 1996 Sep;36(17):2665-74
8917753
Vision Res. 2000;40(4):365-70
10820616
Perception. 1990;19(2):207-21
2235288
Vision Res. 2007 Nov;47(25):3150-9
17928026
Nature. 1970 Apr 11;226(5241):177-8
5437004
Vision Res. 2004 Mar;44(7):695-709
14751554
J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 2000 Sep;17(9):1516-24
10975361
Vision Res. 1979;19(11):1187-95
550578
Vision Res. 1976 Jan;16(1):71-8
1258390
J Vis. 2007 Mar 27;7(2):11.1-13
18217826
Optom Vis Sci. 2003 Nov;80(11):749-52
14627941
Cogn Psychol. 2001 Nov;43(3):171-216
11689021
Vision Res. 1985;25(2):253-65
4013092
Vision Res. 1994 Jul;34(13):1723-33
7941378
J Vis. 2005 Feb 04;5(1):58-70
15831067
J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 1995 Jul;12(7):1417-24
7608786
Vision Res. 1985;25(7):963-77
4049746
J Vis. 2007 Mar 07;7(2):9.1-15
18217824
Optom Vis Sci. 2003 Nov;80(11):745-8
14627940
Spat Vis. 1994;8(2):255-79
7993878
J Opt Soc Am A. 1987 Jul;4(7):1304-13
3625321
Vision Res. 1992 May;32(5):895-902
1604858
J Vis. 2007 Oct 26;7(2):20.1-36
18217835
J Opt Soc Am. 1976 Apr;66(4):332-8
1262981
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002 Apr;43(4):1270-6
11923275
Vision Res. 2002 Sep;42(20):2357-69
12350424
Vision Res. 1978;18(3):335-8
664307
Vision Res. 1996 Feb;36(4):573-88
8855002
Vision Res. 1998 Oct;38(19):2949-62
9797990
J Vis. 2007 Feb 01;7(2):2.1-10
18217817
J Opt Soc Am. 1963 Sep;53:1026-32
14065335