The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Unfocussed spatial attention underlies the crowding effect in indirect form vision
Open accessAbstract
We studied mechanisms underlying the crowding effect in indirect form vision by measuring recognition contrast sensitivity of a character with flankers to the left and right. Attentional and featural contributions to the effect can be separated by a new paradigm that distinguishes pattern location errors from pattern recognition errors and further by manipulating the focusing of spatial attention through a positional cue, appearing 150 ms before the target. Measurements were on the horizontal meridian, at 1, 2, and 4 deg eccentricity, and a range of flankers' distances were used. Our results show that in normal indirect viewing, the impairment of character recognition by crowding is--in particular at intermediate flanker distances--caused to a large part by spatially imprecise focusing of attention. In contrast, the enhancement of performance by a transient positional cue seems mediated through a separate attentional mechanism such that attentional locus and focus are controlled independently. Our results furthermore lend psychophysical support to a separate coding of the what and where in pattern recognition.
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
The information available in brief visual presentations
Sperling, G. (1960) · Psychological Monographs: General and Applied · doi:10.1037/h0093759 · Cited by 4,042
‘What’ and ‘where’ in the human brain
Ungerleider, L. G., & Haxby, J. V. (1994) · Current Opinion in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/0959-4388(94)90066-3 · Cited by 1,913
Cited by
Positive affect increases the breadth of attentional selection
Rowe, G., Hirsh, J. B., & Anderson, A. K. (2007) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0605198104 · Cited by 1,051
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
Crowding and eccentricity determine reading rate
Pelli, D. G., Tillman, K. A., Freeman, J., Su, M., Berger, T. D., & Majaj, N. J. (2007) · Journal of Vision · doi:10.1167/7.2.20 · Cited by 380
Attention as inference: Selection is probabilistic; responses are all-or-none samples.
Vul, E., Hanus, D., & Kanwisher, N. (2009) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/a0017352 · Cited by 86
A comparison study of two P300 speller paradigms for brain–computer interface
Pan, J., Li, Y., Gu, Z., & Yu, Z. (2013) · Cognitive Neurodynamics · doi:10.1007/s11571-013-9253-1 · Cited by 46
Metadata
- Authors
- Strasburger, H.
- Venue
- Journal of Vision
- Published
- 2005-12-28
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 8
- ISSN
- 1534-7362 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2147347876
- Cited by
- 219
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 3.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Unfocussed spatial attention underlies the crowding effect in indirect form vision. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1167/5.11.8
- The paper
- Strasburger, H. (2005). Unfocussed spatial attention underlies the crowding effect in indirect form vision. Journal of Vision. https://doi.org/10.1167/5.11.8
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.