Cited by 93Visual perception and processing mechanismsSpatial Neglect and Hemispheric DysfunctionTactile and Sensory Interactions

Blindsight and unconscious vision: what they teach us about the human visual system

Open access
Ajina, Sara, Bridge, Holly·2017·The Neuroscientist

Abstract

Damage to the primary visual cortex removes the major input from the eyes to the brain, causing significant visual loss as patients are unable to perceive the side of the world contralateral to the damage. Some patients, however, retain the ability to detect visual information within this blind region; this is known as blindsight. By studying the visual pathways that underlie this residual vision in patients, we can uncover additional aspects of the human visual system that likely contribute to normal visual function but cannot be revealed under physiological conditions. In this review, we discuss the residual abilities and neural activity that have been described in blindsight and the implications of these findings for understanding the intact system.

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 · 10.1177/1073858416673817

Cites

113 of 113 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?

  • Blindsight subjects report blindness in part of their visual field, but they are able to use visual information about objects in that region to guide action.

    “Blindsight illustrates the difference: subjects report blindness in part of their visual field, but they are able to use visual information about objects in that region to guide action [17–19].”

    From Dimensions of Animal Consciousness (2020) · cites this paper as [17]

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Farah M Visual agnosias 1990 Cambridge, MA MIT Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ajina, S., & Bridge, H.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Bridge, Holly
Venue
The Neuroscientist
Published
2016-10-23
Volume
23
Issue
5
Pages
529-541
ISSN
  • 1073-8584 (ISSN-L)
  • 1089-4098
OpenAlex
W2536212635
Cited by
93
References
113
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3
FWCI
0.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Neuroscientist (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust
  • The Royal Society
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Spatial Neglect and Hemispheric Dysfunction
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
Keywords
blindsight, primary visual cortex, visual cortex damage, contralateral visual field, residual vision, visual pathway, neuronal activity, visual perception
MeSH terms
Awareness, Humans, Vision, Ocular, Visual Pathways

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