Cited by 503Visual perception and processing mechanismsTactile and Sensory InteractionsVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

Perceptual filling in of artificially induced scotomas in human vision

Ramachandran, V. S., Gregory, R. L.·1991·Nature

Abstract

Patients with scotomas or blind-spots in their visual field resulting from damage to the visual pathways often report that the pattern from the rest of the visual field 'fills in' to occupy the scotoma. Here we describe a novel technique for generating an artificial perceptual scotoma which enabled us to study the spatial and temporal characteristics of this filling-in process. A homogeneous grey square subtending 1.5 degrees was displayed against a background of twinkling two-dimensional noise of equal mean luminance. On steady eccentric fixation for 10 s the square vanished and was filled in by the twinkling noise from the surround. Using this display we found that 'filling in' is an active visual process that probably involves creating an actual neural representation of the surround rather than merely ignoring the absence of information from the scotoma; filling in can occur separately for colour and texture, suggesting separate mechanisms; the filling-in process does not completely suppress information from the scotoma, even after an image has faded completely from consciousness it can nevertheless contribute to motion perception; and the process can be strongly influenced by illusory contours.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/350699a0

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Predictive processing mechanisms endorsed by NREP and AI-C imply that regions of the visual field corresponding to damaged or missing cortex should instead be 'brushed-over' or 'filled in'.

    “Rather, predictive processing mechanisms endorsed by these theories imply that regions of the visual field corresponding to such areas should instead be 'brushed -over' or 'filled in'”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 30 · Cited by 503

Authors
Ramachandran, V. S., & Gregory, R. L.
Affiliations
University of California San Diego (US)
Venue
Nature
Published
1991-04
Volume
350
Issue
6320
Pages
699-702
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2037956375
Cited by
503
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 13
FWCI
8.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
perceptual filling-in, scotoma, visual field defects, visual perception, illusory contours, motion perception, surround suppression
MeSH terms
Humans, Optic Disk, Retina, Scotoma, Vision, Ocular, Visual Cortex, Visual Pathways, Visual Perception

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