The crowding factor method applied to parafoveal vision.
Crowding increases with eccentricity and is most readily observed in the periphery. During natural, active vision, however, central vision plays an important role. Measures of critical distance to estimate crowding are difficult in central vision, as these distances are small. Any overlap of flankers with the target may create an overlay masking confound. The crowding factor method avoids this issue by simultaneously modulating target size and flanker distance and using a ratio to compare crowded to uncrowded conditions. This method was developed and applied in the periphery (Petrov & Meleshkevich, 2011b). In this work, we apply the method to characterize crowding in parafoveal vision (<3.5 visual degrees) with spatial uncertainty. We find that eccentricity and hemifield have less impact on crowding than in the periphery, yet radial/tangential asymmetries are clearly preserved. There are considerable idiosyncratic differences observed between participants. The crowding factor method provides a powerful tool for examining crowding in central and peripheral vision, which will be useful in future studies that seek to understand visual processing under natural, active viewing conditions.
The Smith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute, San Francisco, CA, USA. saeideh@ski.org. http://www.ski.org/users/saeideh-ghahghaei.
Saeideh
S
Ghahghaei
The Smith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute, San Francisco, CA, USA.|Envision Research Institute, Wichita, KS, USA. Laura.Walker@envisionus.com. http://research.envisionus.com/Team/Laura-Walker.
Laura
L
Walker
Nature. 1970 Apr 11;226(5241):177-8
5437004
J Vis. 2014 Sep 03;14(6):3
25187253
Vision Res. 1979;19(6):619-32
547472
Invest Ophthalmol. 1975 Jun;14(6):468-9
1132942
J Vis. 2006 Mar 09;6(3):224-38
16643092
Trends Cogn Sci. 2011 Jun;15(6):254-62
21592844
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2010 Jun;36(3):673-88
20515197
Nat Neurosci. 2012 Jan 08;15(3):463-9, S1-2
22231425
Vision Res. 2011 Dec 8;51(23-24):2488-98
22037360
Vision Res. 2005 Mar;45(5):617-33
15621179
J Vis. 2014 Dec 10;14(6):10
25502230
J Vis. 2010 Mar 23;10(3):1.1-14
20377278
Vision Res. 1985;25(7):963-77
4049746
J Vis. 2007 Feb 05;7(2):4.1-12
18217819
J Vis. 2007 Jul 17;7(2):13.1-10
18217828
J Vis. 2015;15(13):10
26381841
Vision Res. 2000;40(5):473-84
10820606
J Vis. 2011 Nov 18;11(13):18
22101017
J Vis. 2011 Apr 01;11(4):
21460064
Vision Res. 2011 May 25;51(10):1117-23
21439309
J Vis. 2010 Aug 18;10(10):16
20884481
J Exp Psychol Hum Learn. 1980 Jul;6(4):391-9
7391754
Vision Res. 2006 Feb;46(3):417-25
15893785
Nat Neurosci. 2008 Oct;11(10):1129-35
18828191
Exp Brain Res. 2011 May;211(1):119-31
21484396
Cogn Psychol. 2001 Nov;43(3):171-216
11689021
Am J Ophthalmol. 1962 Mar;53:471-7
13917936
J Vis. 2007 Nov 26;7(2):24.1-11
18217839
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2013;66(3):453-70
22150529
Vision Res. 1992 Jul;32(7):1349-57
1455707
J Vis. 2007 Apr 25;7(2):12.1-9
18217827
Vision Res. 1999 Aug;39(16):2729-37
10492833
Vision Res. 2008 Feb;48(5):635-54
18226828
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2013;66(11):2085-91
24161215
Vision Res. 1973 Apr;13(4):767-82
4706350
Vision Res. 2003 Dec;43(27):2895-904
14568377
Vision Res. 2008 Aug;48(17):1777-90
18599105
J Vis. 2015;15(8):5
26057548
Nature. 1996 Sep 26;383(6598):334-7
8848045
Am J Ophthalmol. 1958 Jul;46(1 Pt 2):102-13
13545337
J Vis. 2015 Feb 12;15(2):
25761337