Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39302501›Full record

ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2025

When periphery rules: Enhanced sampling weights of the visual periphery in crowding across dimensions.

Amit Yashar, Marisa Carrasco

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Amit YasharDepartment of Special Education, Faculty of Education, University of Haifa, 199 Abba Khoushy Ave, 3498838, Haifa, Israel. amit.yashar@edu.haifa.ac.il.
Marisa CarrascoDepartment of Psychology and Center for Neural Science, New York University, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

Israel Science Foundation 1980/18
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Crowding, our inability to identify a feature or object - the target - due to its proximity to adjacent features or objects - flankers - exhibits a notable inner-outer asymmetry. This asymmetry is characterized by the outer flanker - more peripheral - creating stronger interference than the inner one - closer to the fovea. But crowding is not uniform across different feature dimensions. For example, in the case of orientation, this asymmetry reflects misreport errors: observers are more likely to misidentify the outer flanker as the target than the inner one. However, for spatial frequency (SF), observers tend to average the features of the target and flankers (Yashar et al., 2019). Here, we investigated whether and how the inner-outer asymmetry manifests across various feature dimensions: Gabor orientation and SF, as well as T-shape tilt and color. We reanalyzed continuous estimation reports data published by Yashar et al. (2019), focusing on a previously unanalyzed factor: the relative position of each flanker (inner vs. outer). We fit probabilistic models that assign variable weights to each flanker. Our analysis revealed that observers predominantly misreport the outer flanker as the target with Gabor orientation and T-shape tilt stimuli, and slightly so with color stimuli, whereas with Gabor SF, observers perform a weighted average of all features but also with a bias towards the outer flanker over the inner one. These findings suggest that an increased weighting on the more peripheral items is a general characteristic of crowding in peripheral vision.

Indexed as

Pattern Recognition, VisualSpace PerceptionVisual FieldsAdultHumansCrowdingInner-outer asymmetryObject recognitionVisual periphery

Identifiers

PMID39302501
PMCPMC12000153

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.