Cited by 79Visual perception and processing mechanismsTactile and Sensory InteractionsFace Recognition and Perception

The limits of shape recognition following late emergence from blindness

Open access
McKyton, Ayelet, Ben-Zion, Itay, Doron, Ravid, Zohary, Ehud·2015·Current Biology

Abstract

Visual object recognition develops during the first years of life. But what if one is deprived of vision during early post-natal development? Shape information is extracted using both low-level cues (e.g., intensity- or color-based contours) and more complex algorithms that are largely based on inference assumptions (e.g., illumination is from above, objects are often partially occluded). Previous studies, testing visual acuity using a 2D shape-identification task (Lea symbols), indicate that contour-based shape recognition can improve with visual experience, even after years of visual deprivation from birth. We hypothesized that this may generalize to other low-level cues (shape, size, and color), but not to mid-level functions (e.g., 3D shape from shading) that might require prior visual knowledge. To that end, we studied a unique group of subjects in Ethiopia that suffered from an early manifestation of dense bilateral cataracts and were surgically treated only years later. Our results suggest that the newly sighted rapidly acquire the ability to recognize an odd element within an array, on the basis of color, size, or shape differences. However, they are generally unable to find the odd shape on the basis of illusory contours, shading, or occlusion relationships. Little recovery of these mid-level functions is seen within 1 year post-operation. We find that visual performance using low-level cues is relatively robust to prolonged deprivation from birth. However, the use of pictorial depth cues to infer 3D structure from the 2D retinal image is highly susceptible to early and prolonged visual deprivation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cub.2015.06.040

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McKyton, A., Ben-Zion, I., Doron, R., & Zohary, E.
Affiliations
  • Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
  • Tel Aviv University (IL)
Corresponding author
Zohary, Ehud
Venue
Current Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-09
Volume
25
Issue
18
Pages
2373-2378
ISSN
0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2104195074
Cited by
79
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1
FWCI
2.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
visual object recognition, visual deprivation, cataract surgery, shape recognition, color recognition, illusory contours, shading, occlusion, pictorial depth cues, visual recovery, Lea symbols
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Blindness, Cataract Extraction, Child, Child, Preschool, Ethiopia, Humans, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Photic Stimulation, Visual Acuity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review