Spatial resolution for feature binding is impaired in peripheral and amblyopic vision

Crowding expands and is less sensitive to target-flanker differences during a shift of visual attention

Target-flanker similarity and critical spacing control visual crowding when attention is pre-allocated, but these have not been studied when attention shifts. Flanked target Gabors appeared 8° left and right of central fixation throughout each 1.5 s trial. Subjects reported target Gabor tilt. In Expt. 1, target blinks increased accuracy, and flanker blinks decreased it, but only when attention shifted left or right from a central RSVP cue, hardly before it, indicating an exogenous/endogenous synergy. Whether parallel or orthogonal, flankers of the same wavelength as the target crowded substantially. Parallel half-wavelength flankers also crowded, but orthogonal half-wavelength ones did not. In Expt. 2, crowding when attention shifts was the same for targets and flankers within Bouma's bound (2.5° apart) as outside it (5.0° apart.) In Expt. 3, Bouma's bound was restored when attention was focused continuously on the target. We conclude that crowding temporarily expands and becomes less discriminative when attention shifts.

Temporal synchronization elicits enhancement of binocular vision functions

Integration of information over the CNS is an important neural process that affects our ability to perceive and react to the environment. The visual system is required to continuously integrate information arriving from two different sources (the eyes) to create a coherent percept with high spatiotemporal precision. Although this neural integration of information is assumed to be critical for visual performance, it can be impaired under some pathological or developmental conditions. Here we took advantage of a unique developmental condition, amblyopia ("lazy eye"), which is characterized by an impaired temporal synchronization between the two eyes, to meticulously study the effect of synchronization on the integration of binocular visual information. We measured the eyes' asynchrony and compensated for it (with millisecond temporal resolution) by providing time-shifted stimuli to the eyes. We found that the re-synchronization of the ocular input elicited a significant improvement in visual functions, and binocular functions, such as binocular summation and stereopsis, were regained. This phenomenon was also evident in neurophysiological measures. Our results can shed light on other neural processing aspects and might also have translational relevance for the field of training, rehabilitation, and perceptual learning.

The functional contributions of consciousness

The most widely endorsed philosophical and scientific theories of consciousness assume that it contributes a single functional capacity to an organism's information processing toolkit. However, conscious processes are a heterogeneous class of psychological phenomena supported by a variety of neurobiological mechanisms. This suggests a plurality of functional contributions of consciousness (FCCs), in the sense that conscious experience facilitates different functional capacities in different psychological domains. In this paper, I first develop a general methodological framework for isolating the psychological functions that are associated with conscious experience. I then use this to show that the leading accounts-Global Workspace Theories, Higher Order Thought Theory and Information Integration Theory-all fail to acknowledge this functional pluralism, which limits their applicability as theories of consciousness.

Central-peripheral dichotomy: color-motion and luminance-motion binding show stronger top-down feedback in central vision

Recently a theory (Zhaoping, Vision Research, 136, 32-49, 2017) proposed that top-down feedback from higher to lower visual cortical areas, to aid visual recognition, is stronger in the central than in the peripheral visual fields. Since top-down feedback helps feature binding, a critical visual recognition process, this theory predicts that insufficient feedback in the periphery should make feature misbinding more likely. To test this prediction, this study assessed binding between color and motion features, or between luminance and motion features, at different visual field eccentricities. We first used color-motion stimuli containing equiluminant red and green dots moving in opposite directions, for example, red dots moved leftward while green dots moved rightward. Such stimuli were shown in both a central reference strip and a peripheral test strip; participants reported whether it was the first or second interval in a trial in which the dots of each color moved in the opposite directions between the two strips. The center of the test strip was at 4° or 15° away from the gaze fixation. Participants' performance was much worse when the test strip was more peripheral, suggesting that feature misbinding occurred more frequently there. This held even when the size and density of the dots were adjusted by eccentricity-dependent cortical magnification factors, and even when red/green dots were replaced by yellow/blue dots or black/white dots to suit the retinal input sampling peripherally. Our findings support that top-down feedback is more directed to central vision, which can resolve ambiguities in feature binding at more central visual locations.

Binocular versus standard occlusion or blurring treatment for unilateral amblyopia in children aged three to eight years

BACKGROUND

Current treatments for amblyopia, typically patching or pharmacological blurring, have limited success. Less than two-thirds of children achieve good acuity of 0.20 logMAR in the amblyopic eye, with limited improvement of stereopsis, and poor adherence to treatment. A new approach, based on presentation of movies or computer games separately to each eye, may yield better results and improve adherence. These treatments aim to balance the input of visual information from each eye to the brain.  OBJECTIVES: To determine whether binocular treatments in children, aged three to eight years, with unilateral amblyopia result in better visual outcomes than conventional patching or pharmacological blurring treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register), MEDLINE, Embase, ISRCTN, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO ICTRP to 19 November 2020, with no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two review authors independently screened the results of the search for relevant studies. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that enrolled children between the ages of three and eight years old with unilateral amblyopia. Amblyopia was classed as present when the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was worse than 0.200 logMAR in the amblyopic eye, with BCVA 0.200 logMAR or better in the fellow eye, in the presence of an amblyogenic risk factor, such as anisometropia, strabismus, or both. To be eligible, children needed to have undergone cycloplegic refraction and  ophthalmic examination, including fundal examination and optical treatment, if indicated, with stable BCVA in the amblyopic eye despite good adherence with wearing glasses. We included any type of binocular viewing intervention, on any device (e.g. computer monitors viewed with liquid-crystal display shutter glasses; hand-held screens, including mobile phones with lenticular prism overlay; or virtual reality displays). Control groups received standard amblyopia treatment, which could include patching or pharmacological blurring of the better-seeing eye. We included full-time (all waking hours) and part-time (between 1 and 12 hours a day) patching regimens. We excluded children who had received any treatment other than optical treatment; and studies with less than 8-week follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcome of the review was the change from baseline of distance BCVA in the amblyopic eye after 16 (± 2) weeks of treatment, measured in logMAR units on an age-appropriate acuity test.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified one eligible RCT of conventional patching treatment versus novel binocular treatment, and analysed a subset of 68 children who fulfilled the age criterion of this review. We obtained data for the mean change in amblyopic eye visual acuity, adverse events (diplopia), and adherence to prescribed treatment at 8- and 16-week follow-up intervals, though no data were available for change in BCVA after 52 weeks. Risk of bias for the included study was considered to be low. The certainty of evidence for the visual acuity outcomes at 8 and 16 weeks of treatment and adherence to the study intervention was rated moderate using the GRADE criteria, downgrading by one level due to imprecision. The certainty of evidence was downgraded by two levels and rated low for the proportion of participants reporting adverse events due to the sample size.  Acuity improved in the amblyopic eye in both the binocular and patching groups following 16 weeks of treatment (improvement of -0.21 logMAR in the binocular group and -0.24 logMAR in the patching group, mean difference (MD) 0.03 logMAR (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.10 to 0.04; 63 children). This difference was non-significant and the improvements in both the binocular and patching groups are also considered clinically similar. Following 8 weeks of treatment, acuity improved in both the binocular and patching groups (improvement of -0.18 logMAR in the patching group compared to -0.16 logMAR improvement in the binocular-treatment group) (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.08). Again this difference was statistically non-significant, and the differences observed between the patching and binocular groups are also clinically non-significant. No adverse event of permanent diplopia was reported. Adherence was higher in the patching group (47% of participants in the iPad group achieved over 75% compliance compared with 90% of the patching group).  Data were not available for changes in stereopsis nor for contrast sensitivity following treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there is only one RCT that offers evidence of the safety and effectiveness of binocular treatment. The authors are moderately confident that after 16 weeks of treatment, the gain in amblyopic eye acuity with binocular treatment is likely comparable to that of conventional patching treatment. However, due to the limited sample size and lack of long term (52 week) follow-up data, it is not yet possible to draw robust conclusions regarding the overall safety and sustained effectiveness of binocular treatment. Further research, using acknowledged methods of visual acuity and stereoacuity assessment with known reproducibility, is required to inform decisions about the implementation of binocular treatments for amblyopia in clinical practice, and should incorporate longer term follow-up to establish the effectiveness of binocular treatment. Randomised controlled trials should also include outcomes reported by users, adherence to prescribed treatment, and recurrence of amblyopia after cessation of treatment.

A dichoptic presentation device and a method for measuring binocular temporal function in the visual system

Recent studies highlight the importance of the temporal domain in visual processing. Critical Flicker Frequency (CFF), the frequency at which a flickering light is perceived as continuous, is a widely used measure for evaluating visual temporal processing. Another important issue to investigate is the cortical interactions arising between the flicker stimuli of both eyes. This paper presents a robust and reliable dichoptic tool for evaluating the CFF threshold in both eyes. This system is based on an analog output device used to independently drive two LEDs through a custom-written MATLAB code (using a laptop PC) for eliciting sinusoidal flickering stimuli and for psychophysically measuring the perceived CFF threshold. The luminance and phases of each LED are individually controlled, enabling the investigation of the effect of phase and luminance differences on binocular summation in subjects with different ocular pathologies. Experiments were designed to evaluate the CFF threshold through a psychophysical test, based on a discrimination task with a stimulus duration of 1 s, based on a temporal alternative forced-choice paradigm. The target stimulus temporal features were modulated using the staircase method. Subjects were requested to discriminate between a target stimulus (a flickering light at various frequencies) and a flickering light at a frequency of 120 Hz, which is significantly higher than the CFF in humans; therefore, it is perceived as constant. One of the main advantages of the introduced dichoptic presentation system is that it enables the visual temporal performance to be measured under both monocular and binocular conditions where phenomena such as temporal binocular summation (BS) can be evaluated. Moreover, the system offers great flexibility by introducing a stimulus phase shift, which enables studying how stimulus timing affects the temporal function at millisecond scale resolution. Our results confirm that no crosstalk exists between the eyes and that the system can reliably separate the stimuli presented to the eyes. Using this set-up, we observed the binocular summation of CFF for low target luminance levels. The CFF was significantly (p = 0.011) higher (5.2%) under binocular compared with monocular viewing conditions. More importantly, introducing an inter - ocular phase shift reduced the binocular CFF in normally sighted subjects. Finally, in amblyopic subjects the amblyopic eye showed a decrease of 3.9 Hz (15%) in CFF, compared with the fellow eye (p = 0.001). The ability to assess binocular temporal performance using a dichoptic display can shed light on visual temporal performance in general, and on binocular temporal summation processes in particular, both for subjects with normal binocular vision and for subjects with impaired binocular vision (e.g., amblyopic subjects). Furthermore, such a presentation set-up may facilitate the development of training paradigms aimed at improving binocular vision performance. In this paper we describe the system and methods in detail and provide all necessary computer code and other details that will enable an easy and quick adaptation of the method by scientists interested in studying the temporal resolution of the visual system in general, and in studying inter-ocular differences or interactions in particular.

Poor peripheral binding depends in part on stimulus color

We have compared two explanations for poor peripheral binding. Binding is the ability to assign the correct features (e.g., color, direction of motion, orientation) to objects. Wu, Kanai, and Shimojo (Nature, 429(6989), 262, 2004) showed that subjects performed poorly on binding dot color with direction of motion in the periphery. Suzuki, Wolfe, Horowitz, and Noguchi (Vision Research, 82, 58-65, 2013) similarly showed that subjects had trouble binding color with line orientation in the periphery. These authors concluded that performance in the periphery was poor because binding is poor in the periphery. However, both studies used red and green stimuli. We tested an alternative hypothesis, that poor peripheral binding is in part due to poor peripheral red/green color vision. Eccentricity-dependent changes in visual processing cause peripheral red/green vision to be worse than foveal vision. In contrast, blue/yellow vision remains centrifugally more stable. We tested 9 subjects in a replication and extension of Suzuki and colleagues' line orientation judgment, in red and green, and in blue and yellow. There were three central conditions: (1) red (or blue) all horizontal, green (or yellow) all vertical; (2) red (or blue) all vertical, green (or yellow) all horizontal; or (3) random pairing of color and orientation. In both the red/green and the blue/yellow color schemes, peripheral performance was influenced by central line orientation, replicating Suzuki and colleagues. However, the effect with blue/yellow lines was smaller, indicating that poor peripheral "binding," as hypothesized by both Wu and colleagues and Suzuki and colleagues, is due in part to their use of red and green stimuli.

Attention in visually typical and amblyopic children

Amblyopia is a cortical visual disorder caused by unequal visual input to the brain from the two eyes during development. Amblyopes show reduced visual acuity and contrast sensitivity and abnormal binocularity, as well as more “global” perceptual losses, such as figure-ground segregation and global form integration. Currently, there is no consensus on the neural basis for these higher-order perceptual losses. One contributing factor could be that amblyopes have deficiencies in attention, such that the attentional processes that control the selection of information favor the better eye. Previous studies in amblyopic adults are conflicting as to whether attentional deficits exist. However, studies where intact attentional ability has been shown to exist were conducted in adults; it is possible that it was acquired through experience. To test this hypothesis, we studied attentional processing in amblyopic children. We examined covert endogenous attention using a classical spatial cueing paradigm in amblyopic and visually typical 5- to 10-year old children. We found that all children, like adults, independently of visual condition, benefited from attentional cueing: They performed significantly better on trials with an informative (valid) cue than with the uninformative (neutral) cue. Response latencies were also significantly shorter for the valid cue condition. No statistically significant difference was found between the performance of the amblyopic and the visually typical children or between dominant and nondominant eyes of all children. The results showed that covert spatial attention is intact in amblyopic and visually typical children and is therefore not likely to account for higher-order perceptual losses in amblyopic children.

What limits search for conjunctions of simple visual features?

Despite of decades of research, we still do not know for sure the roles of internal noise, attention, and crowding in search for conjunctions of simple visual features. In this study, we tried several modifications to the classic design of conjunction-search experiments. In order to match exactly the proportions of simple features, two different targets were presented in target-present trials-vertical red and horizontal blue bars among vertical blue and horizontal red distractors. Both the length of the bars and the number of objects in a display were varied. Positions of objects were selected for minimal crowding effects. Exposure duration was 60 ms, and proportion correct was used as the measure of performance. For conjunction search, the results rejected the unlimited-capacity model and were consistent with limited-capacity attentional processing, and with the Naka-Rushton transform of the target-distractor difference. Qualitatively the same results were obtained when bar length was fixed, and fine orientation difference was used to manipulate target-distractor discriminability. An experiment of feature (orientation) search produced results close to the unlimited-capacity model.

Evaluation of Critical Flicker-Fusion Frequency Measurement Methods for the Investigation of Visual Temporal Resolution

Recent studies highlight the importance of the temporal domain in visual processing. Critical Flicker-Fusion Frequency (CFF), the frequency at which a flickering light is perceived as continuous, is widely used for evaluating visual temporal processing. However, substantial variability in the psychophysical paradigms, used for measuring CFF, leads to substantial variability in the reported results. Here, we report on a comprehensive comparison of CFF measurements through three different psychophysical paradigms: methods of limits; method of constant stimuli, and staircase method. Our results demonstrate that the CFF can be reliably measured with high repeatability by all three psychophysics methods. However, correlations (r = 0.92, p≪0.001) and agreement (Bland Altman test indicated 95% confidence limit variation of ±3.6 Hz), were highest between the staircase and the constant stimuli methods. The time required to complete the test was significantly longer for the constant stimuli method as compared to other methods (p < 0.001). Our results highlight the suitability of the adaptive paradigm for efficiently measuring temporal resolution in the visual system.

The impending demise of the item in visual search

The way the cognitive system scans the visual environment for relevant information - visual search in short - has been a long-standing central topic in vision science. From its inception as a research topic, and despite a number of promising alternative perspectives, the study of visual search has been governed by the assumption that a search proceeds on the basis of individual items (whether processed in parallel or not). This has led to the additional assumptions that shallow search slopes (at most a few tens of milliseconds per item for target-present trials) are most informative about the underlying process, and that eye movements are an epiphenomenon that can be safely ignored. We argue that the evidence now overwhelmingly favours an approach that takes fixations, not individual items, as its central unit. Within fixations, items are processed in parallel, and the functional field of view determines how many fixations are needed. In this type of theoretical framework, there is a direct connection between target discrimination difficulty, fixations, and reaction time (RT) measures. It therefore promises a more fundamental understanding of visual search by offering a unified account of both eye movement and manual response behaviour across the entire range of observed search efficiency, and provides new directions for research. A high-level conceptual simulation with just one free and four fixed parameters shows the viability of this approach.

Binocular versus standard occlusion or blurring treatment for unilateral amblyopia in children aged three to eight years

BACKGROUND

Current treatments for amblyopia in children, occlusion and pharmacological blurring, have had limited success, with less than two-thirds of children achieving good visual acuity of at least 0.20 logMAR in the amblyopic eye, limited improvement of stereopsis, and poor compliance. A new treatment approach, based on the dichoptic presentation of movies or computer games (images presented separately to each eye), may yield better results, as it aims to balance the input of visual information from each eye to the brain. Compliance may also improve with these more child-friendly treatment procedures.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether binocular treatments in children aged three to eight years with unilateral amblyopia result in better visual outcomes than conventional occlusion or pharmacological blurring treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register (last date of searches: 14 April 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2015, Issue 3), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to April 2015), EMBASE (January 1980 to April 2015), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov), and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two review authors independently screened the results of the search in order to identify studies that met the inclusion criteria of the review: randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that enrolled participants between the ages of three and eight years old with unilateral amblyopia, defined as best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) worse than 0.200 logMAR in the amblyopic eye, and BCVA 0.200 logMAR or better in the fellow eye, in the presence of an amblyogenic risk factor such as anisometropia, strabismus, or both. Prior to enrolment, participants were to have undergone a cycloplegic refraction and comprehensive ophthalmic examination including fundal examination. In addition, participants had to have completed a period of optical treatment, if indicated, and BCVA in the amblyopic eye had to remain unchanged on two consecutive assessments despite reportedly good compliance with glasses wearing. Participants were not to have received any treatment other than optical treatment prior to enrolment. We planned to include any type of binocular viewing intervention; these could be delivered on different devices including computer monitors viewed with LCD shutter glasses or hand-held screens including mobile phone screens with lenticular prism overlay. Control groups were to have received standard amblyopia treatment; this could include occlusion or pharmacological blurring of the better-seeing eye. We planned to include full-time (all waking hours) and part-time (between 1 and 12 hours a day) occlusion regimens.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We planned to use standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. We had planned to meta-analyse the primary outcome, that is mean distance BCVA in the amblyopic eye at 12 months after the cessation of treatment.

MAIN RESULTS

We could identify no RCTs in this subject area.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Further research is required to allow decisions about implementation of binocular treatments for amblyopia in clinical practice. Currently there are no clinical trials offering standardised evidence of the safety and effectiveness of binocular treatments, but results from non-controlled cohort studies are encouraging. Future research should be conducted in the form of RCTs, using acknowledged methods of visual acuity and stereoacuity assessment with known reproducibility. Other important outcome measures include outcomes reported by users, compliance with treatment, and recurrence of amblyopia after cessation of treatment.

Visual crowding in V1

In peripheral vision, objects in clutter are difficult to identify. The exact cause of this "crowding" effect is unclear. To perceive coherent shapes in clutter, the visual system must integrate certain local features across receptive fields while preventing others from being combined. It is believed that this selective feature integration-segmentation process is impaired in peripheral vision, leading to crowding. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to investigate the neural origin of crowding. We found that crowding was associated with suppressed fMRI signal as early as V1, regardless of whether attention was directed toward or away from a target stimulus. This suppression in early visual cortex was greatest for stimuli that produced the strongest crowding. In contrast, the pattern of activity was mixed in higher level visual areas, such as the lateral occipital cortex. These results support the view that the deficiency in feature integration and segmentation in peripheral vision is present at the earliest stages of cortical processing.

Crowding follows the binding of relative position and orientation

Crowding--the deleterious influence of clutter on object recognition--disrupts the identification of visual features as diverse as orientation, motion, and color. It is unclear whether this occurs via independent feature-specific crowding processes (preceding the feature binding process) or via a singular (late) mechanism tuned for combined features. To examine the relationship between feature binding and crowding, we measured interactions between the crowding of relative position and orientation. Stimuli were a target cross and two flanker crosses (each composed of two near-orthogonal lines), 15 degrees in the periphery. Observers judged either the orientation (clockwise/counterclockwise) of the near-horizontal target line, its position (up/down relative to the stimulus center), or both. For single-feature judgments, crowding affected position and orientation similarly: thresholds were elevated and responses biased in a manner suggesting that the target appeared more like the flankers. These effects were tuned for orientation, with near-orthogonal elements producing little crowding. This tuning allowed us to separate the predictions of independent (feature specific) and combined (singular) models: for an independent model, reduced crowding for one feature has no effect on crowding for other features, whereas a combined process affects either all features or none. When observers made conjoint judgments, a reduction of orientation crowding (by increasing target-flanker orientation differences) increased the rate of correct responses for both position and orientation, as predicted by our combined model. In contrast, our independent model incorrectly predicted a high rate of position errors, since the probability of positional crowding would be unaffected by changes in orientation. Thus, at least for these features, crowding is a singular process that affects bound position and orientation values in an all-or-none fashion.

Saccade-confounded image statistics explain visual crowding

Processing of shape information in human peripheral visual fields is impeded beyond what can be expected by poor spatial resolution. Visual crowding, the inability to identify objects in clutter, has been shown to be the primary factor limiting shape perception in peripheral vision. Despite the well-documented effects of crowding, its underlying causes remain poorly understood. Given that spatial attention both facilitates learning of image statistics and directs saccadic eye movements, we propose that the acquisition of image statistics in peripheral visual fields is confounded by eye-movement artifacts. Specifically, the image statistics acquired under a peripherally deployed spotlight of attention are systematically biased by saccade-induced image displacements. These erroneously represented image statistics lead to inappropriate contextual interactions in the periphery and cause crowding.

Asymmetries and idiosyncratic hot spots in crowding

Crowding (mutual scrambling of nearby peripheral stimuli) has several known asymmetries. We explored these and other asymmetries systematically across the visual field. Crowding strength for 16 target (Gabor) positions in the visual field (8 directions × 2 eccentricities) were determined by positioning a plaid mask made of two transparently overlaid Gabors either inward, outward, clockwise, or counter-clockwise around the target. Overall, we found a surprisingly large individual variation in crowding strength appearing as idiosyncratic hotspots across the visual field. No correlations were found between the idiosyncratic variations of crowding and visual acuity either across the visual field or across subjects. When averaged across observers the results replicated most of the previously reported asymmetries of crowding. No new types of asymmetries were observed, but we found that the inward-outward asymmetry of crowding is present only along the horizontal meridian. Most surprisingly, we discovered that this asymmetry increases two-fold, if the observer is forced to attend to both left and right visual fields. This indicates that besides other factors attention allocation has a strong effect on the crowding asymmetry.

Visual crowding: a fundamental limit on conscious perception and object recognition

Crowding, the inability to recognize objects in clutter, sets a fundamental limit on conscious visual perception and object recognition throughout most of the visual field. Despite how widespread and essential it is to object recognition, reading and visually guided action, a solid operational definition of what crowding is has only recently become clear. The goal of this review is to provide a broad-based synthesis of the most recent findings in this area, to define what crowding is and is not, and to set the stage for future work that will extend our understanding of crowding well beyond low-level vision. Here we define six diagnostic criteria for what counts as crowding, and further describe factors that both escape and break crowding. All of these lead to the conclusion that crowding occurs at multiple stages in the visual hierarchy.

Positional averaging explains crowding with letter-like stimuli

Visual crowding is a breakdown in object identification that occurs in cluttered scenes, a process that represents the principle restriction on visual performance in the periphery. When crowded objects are presented experimentally, a key finding is that observers frequently report nearby flanking items instead of the target. This observation has led to the proposal that crowding reflects increased noise in the positional code for objects; although how the presence of nearby objects might disrupt positional encoding remains unclear. We quantified this disruption using cross-like stimuli, where observers judged whether the horizontal target line was positioned above or below the stimulus midpoint. Overall, observers were poorer at judging position in the presence of crowding flankers. However, offsetting horizontal lines in the flankers also led observers to report that the horizontal line in the target was shifted in the same direction, an effect that held for subthreshold flanker offsets. In short, crowding induced both random and systematic errors in observers' judgment of position, with or without the detection of flanker structure. Computational modeling reveals that perceived position in the presence of flankers follows a weighted average of noisy target- and flanker-line positions, rather than a substitution of flanker-features into the target, as has been proposed previously. Together, our results suggest that crowding is a preattentive process that uses averaging to regularize the noisy representation of position in the periphery.

Precise discrimination of object position in the human pulvinar

Very little is known about the human pulvinar; suggestions for its function include relaying input from cortical areas, allocating visual attention, supporting feature binding, and other integrative processes. The diversity of hypotheses about pulvinar function highlights our lack of understanding of its basic role. A conspicuously missing piece of information is whether the human pulvinar encodes visual information topographically. The answer to this question is crucial, as it dramatically constrains the sorts of computational and cognitive processes that the pulvinar might carry out. Here we used fMRI to test for position-sensitive encoding in the human pulvinar. Subjects passively viewed flickering Gabor stimuli, and as the spatial separation between Gabors increased, the correlation between patterns of activity across voxels within the right pulvinar decreased significantly. The results demonstrate the existence of precise topographic coding in the human pulvinar lateralized to the right hemisphere, and provide a means of functionally localizing this topographic region.

Crowding--an essential bottleneck for object recognition: a mini-review

Crowding, generally defined as the deleterious influence of nearby contours on visual discrimination, is ubiquitous in spatial vision. Crowding impairs the ability to recognize objects in clutter. It has been extensively studied over the last 80 years or so, and much of the renewed interest is the hope that studying crowding may lead to a better understanding of the processes involved in object recognition. Crowding also has important clinical implications for patients with macular degeneration, amblyopia and dyslexia. There is no shortage of theories for crowding-from low-level receptive field models to high-level attention. The current picture is that crowding represents an essential bottleneck for object perception, impairing object perception in peripheral, amblyopic and possibly developing vision. Crowding is neither masking nor surround suppression. We can localize crowding to the cortex, perhaps as early as V1; however, there is a growing consensus for a two-stage model of crowding in which the first stage involves the detection of simple features (perhaps in V1), and a second stage is required for the integration or interpretation of the features as an object beyond V1. There is evidence for top-down effects in crowding, but the role of attention in this process remains unclear. The strong effect of learning in shrinking the spatial extent of crowding places strong constraints on possible models for crowding and for object recognition. The goal of this review is to try to provide a broad, balanced and succinct review that organizes and summarizes the diverse and scattered studies of crowding, and also helps to explain it to the non-specialist. A full understanding of crowding may allow us to understand this bottleneck to object recognition and the rules that govern the integration of features into objects.

Crowding and surround suppression: not to be confused

Crowding and surround suppression share many similarities, which suggests the possibility of a common mechanism. Despite decades of research, there has been little effort to compare the two phenomena in a consistent fashion. A recent study by D. M. Levi, S. Hariharan, and S. A. Klein (2002) argues that the two are unrelated because crowding effects can be much stronger than suppression effects. Here we report experiments in which the same Gabor target was used both for orientation identification (crowding) and contrast detection (suppression) tasks. In agreement with early crowding studies (e.g., H. Bouma, 1973) we found, that an outward mask is much more effective than an inward mask for the orientation identification task. Notably, no such anisotropy was observed for the contrast detection task, commonly used to measure surround suppression. The anisotropic masking, which defines crowding, is observed only at fine scales (roughly within an octave of the acuity limit), whereas surround suppression is observed at all scales. Our results demonstrate that surround suppression and crowding are indeed two distinct phenomena. We used this characteristic anisotropy to show that a popular crowding paradigm in which target contrast is varied to measure crowding is confounding it with surround suppression. Surround suppression apparently dominates at low contrasts, which would explain some of the reported similarities between the two phenomena.

Sensitivity to biological motion drops by approximately 1/2 log-unit with inversion, and is unaffected by amblyopia

The low-level deficits associated with amblyopia have been studied extensively, but very little is known about potential impairments to higher-level visual processing such as object recognition or structure-from-motion. Studies on biological motion, a complex form of structure-from-motion depicting human actions, have demonstrated that normal observers can analyze these patterns more effectively when they are shown in their original upright configuration as opposed to inverted upside-down (feet-up head-down). We measured this inversion effect quantitatively for both the dominant and amblyopic eyes of amblyopic observers. We found a modest ( approximately 30%) loss in sensitivity in the amblyopic eye for both upright and inverted actors, which we attribute to low-level deficits. However, we found no difference in the inversion effect between the two eyes, both showing an average 1/2 log-unit drop in sensitivity between upright and inverted displays. Our data provide a quantitative estimate of the inversion effect for biological motion, and demonstrate that higher-level processing in the motion hierarchy is not affected by amblyopia.

Crowding is directed to the fovea and preserves only feature contrast

The abundant literature on crowding offers fairly simple explanations for the phenomenon, such as position uncertainty or feature pooling, but convincing evidence to support these explanations is lacking. In part, this is because the stimuli used for crowding studies are usually letters or other complex shapes, which makes it hard to determine exactly what kind of information is lost. In our experiment, we asked observers to identify simultaneously the slants (left or right) of three horizontally aligned Gabor targets. The targets were presented at 6 degrees in the periphery, and their size and separation were chosen to incur strong crowding. The loss of information about the position or orientation of individual members of the Gabor triads does not explain our results. Instead, crowding appears to be a particular form of collective information loss. Firstly, the outmost target was crowded much less than the other targets, which rules out explanations based on simple pooling and shows that crowding has a pronounced foveal directionality. Secondly, the specific pattern of confusion shown by all the observers indicates that the only reliable information available to them was orientation contrast, that is, the number (and, to a lesser degree, the location) of sites where slant changed. Thus, crowding appears to spare only the most salient peripheral information, which supports the hypothesis that crowding is caused by limitations of attentional resolution.