ArticleJournal of vision2021
Characterizing the in-out asymmetry in visual crowding.
Article in Journal of vision, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spatial anisotropy in crowding and ensemble perception.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- Cost and benefit of parafoveal information during reading acquisition as revealed by finger movement patterns.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The impact of training on the inner-outer asymmetry in crowding.Journal of vision · 2023Article
- Attention relieves visual crowding: Dissociable effects of peripheral and central cues.Journal of vision · 2023Article
- Visual field asymmetries in numerosity processing.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2022Article
- Crowding: Recent advances and perspectives.Journal of vision · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
An object's processing is impaired by the presence of nearby clutter. Several distinct mechanisms, such as masking and visual crowding, are thought to contribute to such flanker-induced interference. It is therefore important to determine which mechanism is operational in any given situation. Previous studies have proposed that the in-out asymmetry (IOA), where a peripheral flanker interferes with the target more than a foveal flanker, is diagnostic of crowding. However, several studies have documented inconsistencies in the occurrence of this asymmetry, particularly at locations beyond the horizontal meridian, casting doubt on its ability to delineate crowding. In this study, to determine if IOA is diagnostic of crowding, we extensively charted its properties. We asked a relatively large set of participants (n = 38) to identify a briefly presented peripheral letter flanked by a single inward or outward letter at one of four locations. We also manipulated target location uncertainty and attentional allocation by blocking, randomizing or pre-cueing the target location. Using multilevel Bayesian regression analysis, we found robust IOA at all locations, although its strength was modulated by target location, location uncertainty, and attentional allocation. Our findings suggest that IOA can be an excellent marker of crowding, to the extent that it is not observed in other flanker-interference mechanisms, such as masking.
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.