Cited by 40Visual perception and processing mechanismsOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFace Recognition and Perception

Training improves visual processing speed and generalizes to untrained functions

Open access
Lev, Maria, Ludwig, Karin, Gilaie-Dotan, Sharon, Voss, Stephanie, Sterzer, Philipp, Hesselmann, Guido, Polat, Uri·2014·Scientific Reports

Abstract

Studies show that manipulating certain training features in perceptual learning determines the specificity of the improvement. The improvement in abnormal visual processing following training and its generalization to visual acuity, as measured on static clinical charts, can be explained by improved sensitivity or processing speed. Crowding, the inability to recognize objects in a clutter, fundamentally limits conscious visual perception. Although it was largely considered absent in the fovea, earlier studies report foveal crowding upon very brief exposures or following spatial manipulations. Here we used GlassesOff's application for iDevices to train foveal vision of young participants. The training was performed at reading distance based on contrast detection tasks under different spatial and temporal constraints using Gabor patches aimed at testing improvement of processing speed. We found several significant improvements in spatio-temporal visual functions including near and also non-trained far distances. A remarkable transfer to visual acuity measured under crowded conditions resulted in reduced processing time of 81 ms, in order to achieve 6/6 acuity. Despite a subtle change in contrast sensitivity, a robust increase in processing speed was found. Thus, enhanced processing speed may lead to overcoming foveal crowding and might be the enabling factor for generalization to other visual functions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/srep07251

Cites

93 of 93 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Simple sensory-based judgments and abilities such as Vernier acuity, frequency discrimination, and two-point discrimination can be greatly improved using training with feedback on ongoing judgments.

    “very simple sensory-based judgments and abilities, such as Vernier acuity (vision), frequency discrimination (auditory) and two-point discrimination (tactile), can be greatly improved using training approaches in which subjects are receiving feedback on the basis of their ongoing judgments (Kaas et al., 2013; Lev et al., 2014; Zaltz et al., 2010; Zhou et al., 2006).”

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lev, M., Ludwig, K., Gilaie-Dotan, S., Voss, S., Sterzer, P., Hesselmann, G., & Polat, U.
Affiliations
  • Tel Aviv University (IL)
  • Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (DE)
  • Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
Corresponding author
Polat, Uri
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2014-11-28
Volume
4
Issue
1
Pages
7251-7251
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2087532285
Cited by
40
References
93
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5
FWCI
3.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Scientific Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Refubium (Universitätsbibliothek der Freien Universität Berlin) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Universitätsbibliothek der FU Berlin Hochschulschriftenstelle u. Dokumentenserver
Funders
  • Minerva Foundation
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (6244/1-1, HE 6244/1-1, STE 1430/2-1)
  • Israel Science Foundation
  • Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
perceptual learning, visual processing speed, transfer of training, visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, Gabor patches, contrast detection
MeSH terms
Adult, Humans, Learning, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Psychophysics, Teaching, Visual Perception, Contrast Sensitivity, Young Adult, Spatio-Temporal Analysis

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