2010
DOI: 10.1177/0956797610368811
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: Human perception of a stimulus varies depending on the context in which the stimulus is presented. Such contextual modulation has often been explained by two basic neural mechanisms: lateral inhibition and spatial pooling. In the present study, we presented observers with a vernier stimulus flanked by single lines; observers' ability to discriminate the offset direction of the vernier stimulus deteriorated in accordance with both explanations. However, when the flanking lines were part of a geometric shape (i.… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

7
84
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 81 publications
(91 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
7
84
0
Order By: Relevance
“…When additional flanking lines completed the original flankers into rectangles, performance recovered ( Fig. 3A- Manassi et al, 2012;Sayim et al, 2010). Although the two lines neighboring the vernier are identical in both stimulus configurations, the global interpretation of the stimulus is truly different.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…When additional flanking lines completed the original flankers into rectangles, performance recovered ( Fig. 3A- Manassi et al, 2012;Sayim et al, 2010). Although the two lines neighboring the vernier are identical in both stimulus configurations, the global interpretation of the stimulus is truly different.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Whereas superb resolution is desirable in certain situations, it is not when the human brain needs to process wholes rather than parts. For example, we have shown that strong crowding disappears when the flankers ungroup from the target, e.g., by becoming part of a larger whole (Herzog et al, 2015;Malania et al, 2007;Manassi et al, 2012Manassi et al, , 2013Saarela et al, 2009;Sayim et al, 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…So, when is bigger better in crowding? We proposed that crowding diminishes when the target ungroups and stands out from the flankers (Malania et al, 2007;Saarela et al, 2009;Saarela, Westheimer, & Herzog, 2010;Sayim, Westheimer, & Herzog, 2008;Sayim et al, 2010. Bigger is better in the short and long flanker conditions because adding flankers enhances flanker-flanker grouping and, thus, target ungrouping from the flankers.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Foveal grouping effects were further characterized. We showed that good Gestalt and the global layout of the stimulus determine crowding (Sayim, Westheimer, & Herzog, 2010. In these studies, we used vernier stimuli, which are perfectly suited for foveal crowding because of their small offsets and the small spacing between flankers and vernier.…”
Section: Perceptual Organizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To utilize rigorous psychophysical methods, in the way described by Brindley as class A (Brindley, 1960), the subjects' decisions need to be pared down, ideally to only a yes/ no response whether two stimuli are identical or whether a particular presentation contains a specific component feature. One such probe for Gestalt quality is how well a configuration can act as a separate entity by ungrouping itself from a neighboring spatial task (Sayim, Westheimer, & Herzog, 2010). Relative robustness to blur could serve well as a measuring index for assessing Gestalt rules.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%