Transsaccadic peripheral-foveal associations for familiar and novel objects
0
Citation
0
Reference
10
Related Paper
Abstract:
The theory of transsaccadic feature prediction (Herwig & Schneider, 2014) postulates that through everyday experience the visual system implicitly associates foveal and peripheral information corresponding to the same object. Therefore, peripheral information can be used to predict associated foveal object information for recognition, and foveal information can be used to predict peripheral information for visual search. Here, we tested whether peripheral-foveal associations are better for familiar than for novel objects in two different experiments. In both experiments, participants were trained on a set of novel objects to implicitly associate peripheral and foveal information corresponding to those objects, by using a sham transsacadic orientation discrimination task. On the day after, observers completed a recognition task to measure their familiarity with the trained objects. Following the familiarity measurement, participants in the first experiment performed a 3-AFC peripheral identification task where they needed to pick the foveal target that matched the briefly presented familiar or novel peripheral probe. Participants in the second experiment performed a transsaccadic change detection task where a familiar or novel peripheral object was swapped or not swapped with another object either immediately after the saccade or after a 300 ms blank. We found an advantage of familiar over novel objects in the peripheral identification task of the first experiment. In the transsacadic change detection task of the second experiment, we found an advantage for the blank condition, reproducing the well-known blanking effect. More importantly, we found that intrasaccadic change detection performance with and without blank was better when either one of the objects was familiar. The advantage of familiar over novel objects in both experiments might be caused by two mutually non-exclusive effects: improved peripheral recognition of familiar objects and strengthened peripheral-foveal association for familiar objects.Keywords:
Peripheral vision
Blank
Peripheral vision
Field of view
Cite
Citations (0)
Humans have two distinct vision systems: foveal and peripheral vision. Foveal vision is sharp and detailed, while peripheral vision lacks fidelity. The difference in characteristics of the two systems enable recently popular foveated rendering systems, which seek to increase rendering performance by lowering image quality in the periphery.
Peripheral vision
Cite
Citations (91)
Much research on driver attention, including evaluations of in-car equipment, at least implicitly assumes that attention is where the gaze is. Research on the dynamics of visual attention, however, suggests that drivers may use peripheral vision and that they learn its use over time, depending on the task demands and eccentricity. To investigate effects of task load and position on lane keeping, 11 novices and 16 experienced drivers were asked to drive along a straight road using only peripheral vision for lane keeping while doing another task foveally. The task varied in position and in mental load, with two difficulty levels in each of two different tasks. In the visual attention tasks, position had a clearly different effect on lane-keeping performance among novices and the experienced, as measured by the distance covered before crossing a lane boundary. Novices' performance deteriorated with the foveal task at near periphery at the speedometer level, whereas the performance of experienced drivers dropped only when the foveal task was down in the middle console. The result supports the hypothesis that novices need foveal vision at first for lane keeping but, with increasing practice, learn to manage with more peripheral vision. In the arithmetic tasks, however, no consistent experience-dependent task position effects occurred. Different results obtained for different tasks imply that when evaluating in-car facilities, the task characteristics and the respective resource allocation needed should be taken into account.
Peripheral vision
Visual Search
Cite
Citations (254)
Visual crowding is the inability to recognize a target object in clutter. Previous studies have shown an increase in crowding in both parafoveal and peripheral vision in normal aging and glaucoma. Here, we ask whether there is any increase in foveal crowding in both normal aging and glaucomatous vision. Twenty-four patients with glaucoma and 24 age-matched normally sighted controls (mean age = 65 ± 7 vs. 60 ± 8 years old) participated in this study. For each subject, we measured the extent of foveal crowding using Pelli's foveal crowding paradigm (2016). We found that the average crowding zone was 0.061 degrees for glaucoma and 0.056 degrees for age-matched normal vision, respectively. These values fall into the range of foveal crowding zones (0.0125 degrees to 0.1 degrees) observed in young normal vision. We, however, did not find any evidence supporting increased foveal crowding in glaucoma (p = 0.375), at least in the early to moderate stages of glaucoma. In the light of previous studies on foveal crowding in normal young vision, we did not find any evidence supporting age-related changes in foveal crowding. Even if there is any, the effect appears to be rather inconsequential. Taken together, our findings suggest unlike parafoveal or peripheral crowding (2 degrees, 4 degrees, 8 degrees, and 10 degrees eccentricities), foveal crowding (<0.25 degrees eccentricity) appears to be less vulnerable to normal aging or moderate glaucomatous damage.
Crowding
Peripheral vision
Cite
Citations (3)
Visual processing varies dramatically across the visual field. These differences start in the retina and continue all the way to the visual cortex. Despite these differences in processing, the perceptual experience of humans is remarkably stable and continuous across the visual field. Research in the last decade has shown that processing in peripheral and foveal vision is not independent, but is more directly connected than previously thought. We address three core questions on how peripheral and foveal vision interact, and review recent findings on potentially related phenomena that could provide answers to these questions. First, how is the processing of peripheral and foveal signals related during fixation? Peripheral signals seem to be processed in foveal retinotopic areas to facilitate peripheral object recognition, and foveal information seems to be extrapolated toward the periphery to generate a homogeneous representation of the environment. Second, how are peripheral and foveal signals re-calibrated? Transsaccadic changes in object features lead to a reduction in the discrepancy between peripheral and foveal appearance. Third, how is peripheral and foveal information stitched together across saccades? Peripheral and foveal signals are integrated across saccadic eye movements to average percepts and to reduce uncertainty. Together, these findings illustrate that peripheral and foveal processing are closely connected, mastering the compromise between a large peripheral visual field and high resolution at the fovea.
Peripheral vision
Microsaccade
Fovea centralis
Cite
Citations (109)
Background Anatomical and physiological differences between the central and peripheral visual systems are well documented. Recent findings have suggested that vision in the periphery is not just a scaled version of foveal vision, but rather is relatively poor at representing spatial and temporal phase and other visual features. Shapiro, Lu, Huang, Knight, and Ennis (2010) have recently examined a motion stimulus (the “curveball illusion”) in which the shift from foveal to peripheral viewing results in a dramatic spatial/temporal discontinuity. Here, we apply a similar analysis to a range of other spatial/temporal configurations that create perceptual conflict between foveal and peripheral vision. Methodology/Principal Findings To elucidate how the differences between foveal and peripheral vision affect super-threshold vision, we created a series of complex visual displays that contain opposing sources of motion information. The displays (referred to as the peripheral escalator illusion, peripheral acceleration and deceleration illusions, rotating reversals illusion, and disappearing squares illusion) create dramatically different perceptions when viewed foveally versus peripherally. We compute the first-order and second-order directional motion energy available in the displays using a three-dimensional Fourier analysis in the (x, y, t) space. The peripheral escalator, acceleration and deceleration illusions and rotating reversals illusion all show a similar trend: in the fovea, the first-order motion energy and second-order motion energy can be perceptually separated from each other; in the periphery, the perception seems to correspond to a combination of the multiple sources of motion information. The disappearing squares illusion shows that the ability to assemble the features of Kanisza squares becomes slower in the periphery. Conclusions/Significance The results lead us to hypothesize “feature blur” in the periphery (i.e., the peripheral visual system combines features that the foveal visual system can separate). Feature blur is of general importance because humans are frequently bringing the information in the periphery to the fovea and vice versa.
Peripheral vision
Structure from Motion
Cite
Citations (17)
Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the leading cause of blindness in developed countries. With an ageing population, the prevalence of such a condition has resulted in a large proportion of the population relying on peripheral vision to undertake activities of daily living. Peripheral vision is not a scaled-down version of the fovea, simply requiring larger print or increased contrast for detection of objects or reading text. Even when print size is scaled and eye movements are minimised, the peripheral retina cannot perform at the level of the foveal region. Understanding how and why reading performance is limited as a function of eccentricity has important implications for how we approach rehabilitation of patients with central visual loss. This brief review of the extensive literature on reading with peripheral vision and the research aimed at better reading rehabilitation for low vision patients focuses on why many of the problems associated with the reduced reading capability of peripheral vision cannot be completely solved with magnification, reducing eye movements or modifying print.
Peripheral vision
Vision rehabilitation
Visual Impairment
Cite
Citations (26)
In both adults and children, peripheral vision is poorer than foveal vision, but there is evidence that detection in peripheral vision is relatively poorer in children than it is in adults. That may contribute to the particularly high pedestrian accident rates of children. Two laboratory experiments investigated peripheral vision in men and women and in boys and girls aged 7, 9 and 11. Using an array of stationary lights, Expt 1 examined reactions to apparent movement (the phi phenomenon) in mid and extreme periphery; and, using film sequences of a moving car, Expt 2 included a comparison of foveal and peripheral fields. Overall there was little evidence to support the hypothesis that children have poorer peripheral vision than adults relative to their foveal vision. Nonetheless there were some experimental differences: in Expt 1, 7-year-olds made fewer detections, particularly in the extreme periphery; and, in both experiments, detections tended to be slower. The relatively complex car movements in Expt 2 were detected faster in foveal than peripheral vision. There were no sex differences. Children detected more movements on the left. In Expt 2 these detections were faster, and children made relatively more simulated road crossings when the car approached from the left (all adults 'crossed' in all trials).
Peripheral vision
Fovea centralis
Cite
Citations (21)
This thesis investigates various aspects of peripheral vision, which is known not to be as acute as vision at the point of fixation. Differences between foveal and peripheral vision are generally thought to be of a quantitative rather than a qualitative nature. However, the rate of decline in sensitivity between foveal and peripheral vision is known to be task dependent and the mechanisms underlying the differences are not yet well understood. Several experiments described here have employed a psychophysical technique referred to as 'spatial scaling'. Thresholds are determined at several eccentricities for ranges of stimuli which are magnified versions of one another. Using this methodology a parameter called the E2 value is determined, which defines the eccentricity at which stimulus size must double in order to maintain performance equivalent to that at the fovea. Experiments of this type have evaluated the eccentricity dependencies of detection tasks (kinetic and static presentation of a differential light stimulus), resolution tasks (bar orientation discrimination in the presence of flanking stimuli, word recognition and reading performance), and relative localisation tasks (curvature detection and discrimination). Most tasks could be made equal across the visual field by appropriate magnification. E2 values are found to vary widely dependent on the task, and possible reasons for such variations are discussed. The dependence of positional acuity thresholds on stimulus eccentricity, separation and spatial scale parameters is also examined. The relevance of each factor in producing 'Weber's law' for position can be determined from the results.
Peripheral vision
Stimulus (psychology)
Cite
Citations (2)
Peripheral vision
Eccentricity (behavior)
Fovea centralis
Afterimage
Cite
Citations (41)