ArticleBrain sciences2020
Crowding Effects Across Depth are Fixation-Centered for Defocused Flankers and Observer-Centered for Defocused Targets.
Article in Brain sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Visual crowding: Double dissociation between orientation and brightness judgments.Journal of vision · 2023Article
- Close - but not distant - conditioned flanker emotion affects crowding.Journal of vision · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Depth needs to be considered to understand visual information processing in cluttered environments in the wild. Since differences in depth depend on current gaze position, eye movements were avoided by short presentations in a real depth setup. Thus, allowing only peripheral vision, crowding was tested. That is, the impairment of peripheral target recognition by the presence of nearby flankers was measured. Real depth was presented by a half-transparent mirror that aligned the displays of two orthogonally arranged, distance-adjustable screens. Fixation depth was at a distance of 190 cm, defocused depth planes were presented either near or far, in front of or behind the fixation depth, all within the depth of field. In Experiments 1 and 2, flankers were presented defocused, while the to-be-identified targets were on the fixation depth plane. In Experiments 3-5, targets were presented defocused, while the flankers were kept on the fixation depth plane. Results for defocused flankers indicate increased crowding effects with increased flanker distance from the target at focus (near to far). However, for defocused targets, crowding for targets in front of the focus as compared to behind was increased. Thus, defocused targets produce decreased crowding with increased target distance from the observer. To conclude, the effects of flankers in depth seem to be centered around fixation, while effects of target depth seem to be observer-centered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.