ArticlePloS one2024
The resolution of face perception varies systematically across the visual field.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spatial anisotropy in crowding and ensemble perception.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- Rethinking perceptual distortions in amblyopia: toward a multi-feature, visual-field-wide perspective.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Does radial bias contribute to fast saccades toward faces in the periphery?Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Visual abilities tend to vary predictably across the visual field-for simple low-level stimuli, visibility is better along the horizontal vs. vertical meridian and in the lower vs. upper visual field. In contrast, face perception abilities have been reported to show either distinct or entirely idiosyncratic patterns of variation in peripheral vision, suggesting a dissociation between the spatial properties of low- and higher-level vision. To assess this link more clearly, we extended methods used in low-level vision to develop an acuity test for face perception, measuring the smallest size at which facial gender can be reliably judged in peripheral vision. In 3 experiments, we show the characteristic inversion effect, with better acuity for upright faces than inverted, demonstrating the engagement of high-level face-selective processes in peripheral vision. We also observe a clear advantage for gender acuity on the horizontal vs. vertical meridian and a smaller-but-consistent lower- vs. upper-field advantage. These visual field variations match those of low-level vision, indicating that higher-level face processing abilities either inherit or actively maintain the characteristic patterns of spatial selectivity found in early vision. The commonality of these spatial variations throughout the visual hierarchy means that the location of faces in our visual field systematically influences our perception of them.
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.