Spatial selection in peripheral letter recognition: in search of boundary conditions

Huckauf, Anke; Heller, Dieter

doi:10.1016/s0001-6918(02)00045-8

Cited by 49 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies have shown that mislocation errors (i.e., reporting another letter in the stimulus string) can account for some of the reduced performance in crowding tasks (Fine, 2001;Huckauf & Heller, 2002a, 2002b. To determine whether mislocation errors varied depending on stimulus type, a 2 (group) ϫ 2 (location) ϫ 2 (stimulus type) ϫ 2 (error position: left or right of the target) ANOVA was calculated.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relative benefit of word context is a constant proportion of letter identification time

Fine

2004

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Letter identification is reduced when the target letter is surrounded by other, flanking letters. This visual crowding is known to be impacted by physical changes to the target and flanks, such as spatial frequency content, polarity, and interletter spacing. There is also evidence that visual crowding is reduced when the flanking letters and the target letter form a word. The research reported here investigated whether these two phenomena are independent of each other or whether the degree of visual crowding impacts the benefit of word context. Stimulus duration thresholds for letters presented alone and for the middle letters of 3-letter words and nonwords were determined for stimuli presented at the fovea and at the periphery. In Experiment 1, the benefit of word context was found to be the same at the fovea, where visual crowding is minimal, and at the periphery, where visual crowding is substantial. In Experiment 2, visual crowding was manipulated by changing the interletter spacing. Here, too, the benefit of word context was fairly constant for the two retinal locations (fovea or periphery), as well as with changes in interletter spacing. These data call into question both the idea that the benefit of word context is greater when stimulus quality is reduced (as is the case with visual crowding) and the idea that words are processed more effectively when they are presented at the fovea.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relative benefit of word context is a constant proportion of letter identification time

Fine

2004

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, the recognition mechanisms seem to be similar for stimuli at the fixation depth in both studies, whereas our study shows that processing in defocused depths might be different. It is assumed that positional uncertainty plays a substantial role in crowding effects (Huckauf and Heller, 2002a;2002b). Strasburger (2005) claimed that especially imprecision in spatial attention are responsible for that.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Crowding also varies with spacing: increasing the spacing between target and flankers results in increasing target recognisability, that is, in decreased crowding. To which extent target selection processes contribute to crowding is under discussion (e.g., Huckauf and Heller, 2002a;2002b;Strasburger et al, 2011;Strasburger and Malania, 2013). Bouma (1970) found that target eccentricity and spacing interact.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining Crowding Using a Real Three-Dimensional Experimental Setup

Eberhardt

Huckauf

2017

Proceedings of the Latvian Academy of Sciences. Section B. Natural, Exact, and Applied Sciences.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Moreover, there are already some indications that crowding effects arise because of positional uncertainty (e.g., Chung et al, 2001;Fine, 2001;Huckauf & Heller, 2002). Also, Di Lollo et al (2000) have claimed that one reason for the reentering of higher level signals into lower levels of processing is the fact that sensitivity to location is reduced during higher level coding.…”

Section: Experiments 3a and 3bmentioning

confidence: 99%