The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The effect of similarity and duration on spatial interaction in peripheral vision
Abstract
Spatial interactions are extensive in the peripheral visual field, extending up to about half the retinal eccentricity of the target (Toet and Levi, Vision Res. 32, 1349-1357, 1992). In the present study it is shown that the degree and extent of peripheral spatial interaction depends in large measure on the similarity between test and flanking stimuli. The stimulus consisted of a test T surrounded by four distracting flanking Ts, each randomly oriented. The task was to determine the orientation of the test T. The test and flanking Ts differed in contrast polarity, shape, depth, color, eye of origin, or contrast. When the target and flanks differed in contrast polarity, depth, or shape, performance improved markedly for all observers. A color difference enhanced the performance of most but not all observers. Eye-of-origin had no effect, that is, spatial interaction was identical when the target and flanks were presented to the same eye, or to opposite eyes. The role of stimulus duration in spatial interaction was examined in two additional experiments. In the first, the stimulus viewing duration was increased in order to allow the observer time to serially search for the test T. In the second experiment, a postmask was presented at the location of the test T. The results of these experiments showed that the influence of similarity was independent of stimulus duration and the postmask, and suggest that serial search does not play an important role in the spatial interaction effects reported here. The extent of spatial interaction is correlated with the ability to do parallel search.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task
Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03203267 · Cited by 7,230
Cited by
Visual crowding: a fundamental limit on conscious perception and object recognition
Whitney, D., & Levi, D. M. (2011) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2011.02.005 · Cited by 849
Self-citationCrowding is unlike ordinary masking: Distinguishing feature integration from detection
Pelli, D. G., Palomares, M., & Majaj, N. J. (2004) · Journal of Vision · doi:10.1167/4.12.12 · Cited by 832
The Spatial Resolution of Visual Attention
Intriligator, J., & Cavanagh, P. (2001) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1006/cogp.2001.0755 · Cited by 733
Individual Differences among Grapheme-Color Synesthetes: Brain-Behavior Correlations
Hubbard, E. M., Arman, A. C., Ramachandran, V. S., & Boynton, G. M. (2005) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2005.02.008 · Cited by 355
The fundamentals of eye tracking part 6: working with areas of interest
Hooge, I. T. C., Nyström, M., Niehorster, D. C., Andersson, R., Foulsham, T., Nuthmann, A., & Hessels, R. S. (2026) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-025-02937-3 · Cited by 22
Metadata
- Authors
- Levi, D. M., Toet, A., Tripathy, S. P., & Kooi, F. L.
- Venue
- Spatial Vision
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 1994
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 255-279
- ISSN
- 0169-1015 (ISSN-L)
- 1568-5683
- OpenAlex
- W2044147198
- Cited by
- 399
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 1.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The effect of similarity and duration on spatial interaction in peripheral vision. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1163/156856894x00350
- The paper
- Levi, D. M., Toet, A., Tripathy, S. P., & Kooi, F. L. (1994). The effect of similarity and duration on spatial interaction in peripheral vision. Spatial Vision. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856894x00350
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.