Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32489576›Full record

Reviewi-Perception

Seven Myths on Crowding and Peripheral Vision.

Hans Strasburger

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in i-Perception. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Eye movements during gaze perception.Journal of vision · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Predicting visual field boundaries from head features.Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Attention in redundancy masking.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Hans StrasburgerGeorg-August-Universität, Göttingen, Germany Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7156-5111

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Crowding has become a hot topic in vision research, and some fundamentals are now widely agreed upon. For the classical crowding task, one would likely agree with the following statements. (1) Bouma's law can be stated, succinctly and unequivocally, as saying that critical distance for crowding is about half the target's eccentricity. (2) Crowding is predominantly a peripheral phenomenon. (3) Peripheral vision extends to at most 90° eccentricity. (4) Resolution threshold (the minimal angle of resolution) increases strongly and linearly with eccentricity. Crowding increases at an even steeper rate. (5) Crowding is asymmetric as Bouma has shown. For that inner-outer asymmetry, the peripheral flanker has more effect. (6) Critical crowding distance corresponds to a constant cortical distance in primary visual areas like V1. (7) Except for Bouma's seminal article in 1970, crowding research mostly became prominent starting in the 2000s. I propose the answer is "not really" or "not quite" to these assertions. So should we care? I think we should, before we write the textbook chapters for the next generation.

Indexed as

asymmetriescortical mapcrowdingfoveaperceptionperipheral visionpsychophysicsreadingsensory systemsvision sciencevisual acuityvisual field

Identifiers

PMID32489576
PMCPMC7238452

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.