Visual crowding explained

Visual crowding is the inability to view a target stimulus distinctly when presented in a clutter. Crowding impairs the ability to discriminate object features and contours among flankers, which in turn impairs people's ability to respond appropriately to the target stimulus.[1]

An operational definition of crowding explains what crowding is and how it is different from similar effects such as masking, lateral interaction and surround suppression; effects that make the target more challenging to see as well. There are different criteria that are used to differentiate crowding from these other effects. Firstly, crowding makes it difficult to identify an object but not detecting it among the clutter.[2] [3] [4] Crowded objects are collectively perceived to have high contrast, but they remain indistinct. The eccentricity of the target and the distance between the target and flankers influence crowding. As the distance between the target and the flankers' increases at a given eccentricity the ability to detect the target also improves as the eccentricity of a target is increased the more it pops out from the flankers and the more easily it is identified.[5]

Crowding is anisotropic, which means it has different values when measured in different directions. Radially positioned flankers make it harder to identify the target than tangentially positioned ones.[6] Crowding is stronger in the upper field of the four quadrants than the lower ones.[7] A recent study tells us that crowding is intense where the distractor and the target are in the same visual field than when they are in separate visual fields despite equal retinal distance.[8] Crowding is also asymmetrical meaning that a single flanker at an eccentric locus higher than the target makes it harder to identify the target than the single flanker at an eccentric locus closer to the fovea. Crowding is not just a spatial phenomenon it happens over time as well, when a target is moving it is found to be more crowded when the flankers are leading than when they follow the target.[9]

Information that survives crowding

There is much information that gets through to peoples conscious even under the circumstances of crowding these include the appearance of a feature, people can easily perceive the appearance of a feature but cannot identify or discriminate the changes in this feature.[10] Secondly, After effects from adaptation survive crowding, adapting to a target in a crowded stimulus can help people form an orientation[8] and track the motion of the target.[11] [12] Next is combined orientation, even though people are not able to tell the individual orientation of a target stimulus in a crowded setting, they can reliably report an average combined orientation of the stimulus, which means that the orientation signals from the target stimulus are combined than lost.[13]

Some target identity information survives crowding, people can identify more correct targets from a crowded setting when they are asked to report information on both the target and the flanker. Sometimes certain information such as the target information is lost, but the people are able to make better "target “ responses in this condition. Some information on the target is preserved, but most of the times the location information is lost.[14] [15] [16]

Reduction

Crowding is broken when the target and stimulus are different than when they are similar. The difference of target group from the flanker group of stimulus in shape, size,[17] [18] orientation,[19] [20] polarity,[21] spatial frequency,[22] depth, color,[13] [23] motion and order,[24] breaks crowding.  Crowding happens among faces(holistic crowding) having an inverted face flanker when searching for an upright face breaks crowding. Which makes upright faces more effective flankers.[25] [26] Providing cue about the target location tends to reduce crowding.[27] [28] [29] Crowding is broken when the flankers are collectively masked, but this happens only when the flankers are masked with noise or using metacontrast masks but not with substitution masks.[30] When people are adapted to look for a target stimulus in a certain spatial position, it renders the flankers perceptually invisible (adaptation induced blindness), thus releasing the effect of crowding.[31]

Mechanism

Neurophysiological studies have not made much progress in narrowing down the locus of the brain at which crowding occurs. Previous researches have demonstrated that crowding is “dichoptical” meaning that the target is perceived by one eye and the distractor by the other.[32] [33] Which should mean that the effect of crowding occurs in the cortex. Different researchers have claimed different sites to be the processing center for crowding e.g. (V1,[34] V2, V3,[35] [36] V4[37] [38] some researchers claim crowding happens at a later stage of visual processing). So, the locus of the brain at which crowding occurs is still not clearly defined.

Models

From the many models that try and explain the process of crowding, there is still a lack of an actual model that helps predict the entirety of how crowding works. All models have three major division that remains as its essence: masking, pooling and substitution. The pooling can be of the low-level features or the pooling of attention. One of the model that nicely predicts is the model by Wilkinson where he boils down the process of crowding to the interaction between complex cells and simple cells, where the simple cells suppress weak complex cell responses and the complex cells respond actively resulted from spatial pooling and then they suppress simple cell activity in their receptive cell area[41].

Another model that best predicts crowding process proposes a quantitative model for a spatial integration of orientation signals, As per the principles of population coding, this model satisfactorily predicts properties like critical spacing, compulsory averaging and the inner and outer asymmetry.

Levels

Different studies implicitly assume that crowding is a unitary effect due to a single stage of processing.[39] The other notion states that crowding happens independently at several stages of visual processing. This notion supports the view that crowding is influenced by the similarity and configuration of flankers and the target. By this notion, the effect is selectively observed between whole objects, object parts,[40] and features. This view is also consistent with Bouma's law. This view has gained much support. Crowding in a natural setting may also occur in layers depending on the location, content and attention dependence.

Bouma’s Law

Herman Bouma, a Dutch vision researcher and gerontologist stated, “For complete visual isolation of a letter presented at an eccentricity of φ deg, … no other letters should be present within (roughly) 0.5 φ distance." At a later stage, he reduced the proportionality constant from 0.5 to 0.4. This gave rise to the notion of “critical spacing” which is proportional to the eccentricity. Critical spacing is the sufficient distance needed for the identification of an object among its flankers in the retinotopically organized cortex. Bouma explains how the effect of crowding is dependent on the eccentricity of a subject and the distance between the flankers and the object. Many studies support the claim that critical space needed for crowding depends on the eccentricity of the subject.[41] The proportionality constant named b, after Bouma, is dependent on how similar the flankers are to the target, the number of possible targets, and the arbitrary threshold criterion.[42] The value of Boumas proportionality constant ‘b’ is different among studies, but most of the times it is reported to be ≈0.4 - 0.5. This rule is sometimes raised to the status of a 'law' but this remains controversial.

Notes and References

  1. Whitney D, Levi DM . Visual crowding: a fundamental limit on conscious perception and object recognition . Trends in Cognitive Sciences . 15 . 4 . 160–8 . April 2011 . 21420894 . 3070834 . 10.1016/j.tics.2011.02.005 .
  2. Levi DM, Hariharan S, Klein SA . Suppressive and facilitatory spatial interactions in peripheral vision: peripheral crowding is neither size invariant nor simple contrast masking . Journal of Vision . 2 . 2 . 167–77 . 2002 . 12678590 . 10.1167/2.2.3 . free .
  3. Levi DM, Hariharan S, Klein SA . Suppressive and facilitatory spatial interactions in amblyopic vision . Vision Research . 42 . 11 . 1379–94 . May 2002 . 12044744 . 10.1016/S0042-6989(02)00061-5 . free .
  4. Pelli DG, Palomares M, Majaj NJ . Crowding is unlike ordinary masking: distinguishing feature integration from detection . Journal of Vision . 4 . 12 . 1136–69 . December 2004 . 15669917 . 10.1167/4.12.12 . free .
  5. Bouma H . Interaction effects in parafoveal letter recognition . Nature . 226 . 5241 . 177–8 . April 1970 . 5437004 . 10.1038/226177a0 . 1970Natur.226..177B . 29459715 .
  6. Toet A, Levi DM . The two-dimensional shape of spatial interaction zones in the parafovea . Vision Research . 32 . 7 . 1349–57 . July 1992 . 1455707 . 10.1016/0042-6989(92)90227-A . 8123408 .
  7. He S, Cavanagh P, Intriligator J . Attentional resolution and the locus of visual awareness . Nature . 383 . 6598 . 334–7 . September 1996 . 8848045 . 10.1038/383334a0 . 1996Natur.383..334H . 4354509 .
  8. Liu T, Jiang Y, Sun X, He S . Reduction of the crowding effect in spatially adjacent but cortically remote visual stimuli . Current Biology . 19 . 2 . 127–32 . January 2009 . 19135367 . 3175242 . 10.1016/j.cub.2008.11.065 . 2009CBio...19..127L .
  9. Bex PJ, Dakin SC, Simmers AJ . The shape and size of crowding for moving targets . Vision Research . 43 . 27 . 2895–904 . December 2003 . 14568377 . 10.1016/S0042-6989(03)00460-7 . free .
  10. Levi DM, Carney T . Crowding in peripheral vision: why bigger is better . Current Biology . 19 . 23 . 1988–93 . December 2009 . 19853450 . 3045113 . 10.1016/j.cub.2009.09.056 . 2009CBio...19.1988L .
  11. Aghdaee SM . Adaptation to spiral motion in crowding condition . Perception . 34 . 2 . 155–62 . 2005 . 15832566 . 10.1068/p5298 . 25291055 .
  12. Whitney D . Motion distorts perceived position without awareness of motion . Current Biology . 15 . 9 . R324-6 . May 2005 . 15886084 . 3890254 . 10.1016/j.cub.2005.04.043 . 2005CBio...15.R324W .
  13. Gheri C, Morgan MJ, Solomon JA . The relationship between search efficiency and crowding . Perception . 36 . 12 . 1779–87 . 2007 . 18283928 . 2590853 . 10.1068/p5595 .
  14. Popple AV, Levi DM . The perception of spatial order at a glance . Vision Research . 45 . 9 . 1085–90 . April 2005 . 15707915 . 10.1016/j.visres.2004.11.008 . free .
  15. Strasburger H . Unfocused spatial attention underlies the crowding effect in indirect form vision . Journal of Vision . 5 . 11 . 1024–37 . December 2005 . 16441200 . 10.1167/5.11.8 . free .
  16. Huckauf A, Knops A, Nuerk HC, Willmes K . Semantic processing of crowded stimuli? . Psychological Research . 72 . 6 . 648–56 . November 2008 . 18841386 . 10.1007/s00426-008-0171-5 . 10760582 .
  17. Kooi FL, Toet A, Tripathy SP, Levi DM . The effect of similarity and duration on spatial interaction in peripheral vision . Spatial Vision . 8 . 2 . 255–79 . 1994 . 7993878 . 10.1163/156856894X00350 .
  18. van den Berg R, Roerdink JB, Cornelissen FW . A neurophysiologically plausible population code model for feature integration explains visual crowding . PLOS Computational Biology . 6 . 1 . e1000646 . January 2010 . 20098499 . 2799670 . 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000646 . 2010PLSCB...6E0646V . free .
  19. Andriessen JJ, Bouma H . Eccentric vision: adverse interactions between line segments . Vision Research . 16 . 1 . 71–8 . January 1976 . 1258390 . 10.1016/0042-6989(76)90078-X . 23025320 .
  20. Danilova MV, Bondarko VM . Foveal contour interactions and crowding effects at the resolution limit of the visual system . Journal of Vision . 7 . 2 . 25.1–18 . November 2007 . 18217840 . 2652120 . 10.1167/7.2.25 .
  21. Chakravarthi R, Cavanagh P . Temporal properties of the polarity advantage effect in crowding . Journal of Vision . 7 . 2 . 11.1–13 . March 2007 . 18217826 . 10.1167/7.2.11 . free .
  22. Chung ST, Levi DM, Legge GE . Spatial-frequency and contrast properties of crowding . Vision Research . 41 . 14 . 1833–50 . June 2001 . 11369047 . 10.1016/S0042-6989(01)00071-2 . free .
  23. Põder E, Wagemans J . Crowding with conjunctions of simple features . Journal of Vision . 7 . 2 . 23.1–12 . November 2007 . 18217838 . 10.1167/7.2.23 . free .
  24. Chung ST, Li RW, Levi DM . Crowding between first- and second-order letter stimuli in normal foveal and peripheral vision . Journal of Vision . 7 . 2 . 10.1–13 . March 2007 . 18217825 . 2747649 . 10.1167/7.2.10 .
  25. Farzin F, Rivera SM, Whitney D . Holistic crowding of Mooney faces . Journal of Vision . 9 . 6 . 18.1–15 . June 2009 . 19761309 . 2857385 . 10.1167/9.6.18 .
  26. Louie EG, Bressler DW, Whitney D . Holistic crowding: selective interference between configural representations of faces in crowded scenes . Journal of Vision . 7 . 2 . 24.1–11 . November 2007 . 18217839 . 3849395 . 10.1167/7.2.24 .
  27. Yeshurun Y, Rashal E . Precueing attention to the target location diminishes crowding and reduces the critical distance . Journal of Vision . 10 . 10 . 16 . August 2010 . 20884481 . 10.1167/10.10.16 . free .
  28. Chakravarthi R, Cavanagh P . Bilateral field advantage in visual crowding . Vision Research . 49 . 13 . 1638–46 . June 2009 . 19362572 . 2760476 . 10.1016/j.visres.2009.03.026 .
  29. Freeman J, Pelli DG . An escape from crowding . Journal of Vision . 7 . 2 . 22.1–14 . October 2007 . 18217837 . 10.1167/7.2.22 . free .
  30. Chakravarthi R, Cavanagh P . Recovery of a crowded object by masking the flankers: determining the locus of feature integration . Journal of Vision . 9 . 10 . 4.1–9 . September 2009 . 19810785 . 2766569 . 10.1167/9.10.4 .
  31. Wallis TS, Bex PJ . Visual crowding is correlated with awareness . Current Biology . 21 . 3 . 254–8 . February 2011 . 21277208 . 3051843 . 10.1016/j.cub.2011.01.011 . 2011CBio...21..254W .
  32. Flom MC, Heath GG, Takahashi E . Contour Interaction and Visual Resolution: Contralateral Effects . Science . 142 . 3594 . 979–80 . November 1963 . 14069233 . 10.1126/science.142.3594.979 . 1963Sci...142..979F . 33685647 .
  33. Tripathy SP, Levi DM . Long-range dichoptic interactions in the human visual cortex in the region corresponding to the blind spot . Vision Research . 34 . 9 . 1127–38 . May 1994 . 8184557 . 10.1016/0042-6989(94)90295-X . 15338292 .
  34. Pelli DG . Crowding: a cortical constraint on object recognition . Current Opinion in Neurobiology . 18 . 4 . 445–51 . August 2008 . 18835355 . 3624758 . 10.1016/j.conb.2008.09.008 .
  35. Tyler CW, Likova LT . Crowding: a neuroanalytic approach . Journal of Vision . 7 . 2 . 16.1–9 . July 2007 . 18217831 . 10.1167/7.2.16 . free .
  36. Bi T, Cai P, Zhou T, Fang F . The effect of crowding on orientation-selective adaptation in human early visual cortex . Journal of Vision . 9 . 11 . 13.1–10 . October 2009 . 20053076 . 10.1167/9.11.13 . free .
  37. Motter BC . Modulation of transient and sustained response components of V4 neurons by temporal crowding in flashed stimulus sequences . The Journal of Neuroscience . 26 . 38 . 9683–94 . September 2006 . 16988039 . 6674438 . 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5495-05.2006 .
  38. Merigan WH . Cortical area V4 is critical for certain texture discriminations, but this effect is not dependent on attention . Visual Neuroscience . 17 . 6 . 949–58 . November 2000 . 11193111 . 10.1017/S095252380017614X . 13095796 .
  39. Levi DM . Crowding--an essential bottleneck for object recognition: a mini-review . Vision Research . 48 . 5 . 635–54 . February 2008 . 18226828 . 2268888 . 10.1016/j.visres.2007.12.009 .
  40. Martelli M, Majaj NJ, Pelli DG . Are faces processed like words? A diagnostic test for recognition by parts . Journal of Vision . 5 . 1 . 58–70 . February 2005 . 15831067 . 10.1167/5.1.6 . free .
  41. Tripathy SP, Cavanagh P . The extent of crowding in peripheral vision does not scale with target size . Vision Research . 42 . 20 . 2357–69 . September 2002 . 12350424 . 10.1016/S0042-6989(02)00197-9 . free .
  42. Pelli DG, Tillman KA . The uncrowded window of object recognition . Nature Neuroscience . 11 . 10 . 1129–35 . October 2008 . 18828191 . 2772078 . 10.1038/nn.2187 .

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Visual crowding".

Except where otherwise indicated, Everything.Explained.Today is © Copyright 2009-2024, A B Cryer, All Rights Reserved. Cookie policy.