Abstract:Purpose: Recent debates on mechanisms of visual crowding are focused on whether crowding results from lower-level target-flanker feature binding, or higher-level insufficient resolution of attention. We took a novel route to understand crowding by investigating whether and where the correct target information could be traced when wrong responses are made. Methods: A letter target with flankers was presented in the right visual hemi-field (10° eccentricity). Subjects reported either the central target letter (partial report) or all three letters from left to right (full report). Results: 1) With the target size set substantially sub-threshold, full-report data suggest: a. The correct report rate of the target at the center location was comparable to that with partial report; b. Report of the center target at the right flanker location was substantial; c. So was the left flanker being reported at the center location. 2) Halving the left flanker contrast increased the center report rate of the left flanker, which, however, unchanged the center report rate of the center target. 3) Restricting stimulus misplacement by assigning half letters as target and half letters as flankers, which the subjects knew, reduced crowding by 30–40% in partial report. 4) Under the same conditions of 3), crowding became much weaker when flankers were pixel-scrambled (no more features), but was stronger when flankers were stroke-scrambled (intact features but broken Gestalt). Conclusions: 1) A significant portion of target information is not lost during crowding, but is positionally confused with flankers, presumably in the visual memory. 2) Flanker misplacement (Strasburger, 2002) had little effect on pure target identification. Center target identification under crowding may be earlier than flanker, and probably also center target, misplacement. 3) Top-down influences which control target misplacement improve correct report rate. 3) Lower-level stimulus configurations affect stimulus identification under crowding, consistent with the feature binding account.

Perceptual Salience of Global Structures and the Crowding-Effect in Amblyopia

Can perceptual learning alleviate the global motion direction discrimination deficit in amblyopia

Global Contour Processing in Amblyopia

Is There a "Top-Down" Component of Crowding in Peripheral and Amblyopic Vision?

Landolt C-Tests With "Fixed" Arcmin Separations Detect Amblyopia But Underestimate Crowding in Moderate-to-Severe Amblyopic Children and Adults

Visual Crowding Reveals Field- and Axis-Specific Cortical Miswiring After Long-Term Axial Misalignment in Strabismic Patients Without Amblyopia

Visual Crowding in Glaucoma

Foveal Crowding Resolved

Neural Mechanisms of Visual Crowding Effect

Evidence for Misplaced Target Information with Letter Crowding

Radial-tangential Anisotropy of Crowding in the Early Visual Areas.

Neural correlates of visual spatial selective attention are altered at early and late processing stages in human amblyopia

Visual crowding effect in the parvocellular and magnocellular visual pathways

A common cortical basis for variations in visual crowding

Mixture-modeling approach reveals global and local processes in visual crowding

Broad attention uncovers benefits of stimulus uniformity in visual crowding

A Comparison of Foveal and Peripheral Contour Interaction and Crowding

Radial-tangential anisotropy of crowding 1 2 3 Radial-tangential anisotropy of crowding in the early visual areas 4 5

Transient attention equally reduces visual crowding in radial and tangential axes

Presenting a Target and Its Surrounding Flankers in Different Eyes Reduces Visual Crowding, Even Though Eye of Origin Difference is Imperceptible

Crowding Modulates Activity in V1