Comparing crowding in human and ideal observers.

A visual target is more difficult to recognize when it is surrounded by other, similar objects. This breakdown in object recognition is known as crowding. Despite a long history of experimental work, computational models of crowding are still sparse. Specifically, few studies have examined crowding using an ideal-observer approach. Here, we compare crowding in ideal observers with crowding in humans. We derived an ideal-observer model for target identification under conditions of position and identity uncertainty. Simulations showed that this model reproduces the hallmark of crowding, namely a critical spacing that scales with viewing eccentricity. To examine how well the model fits quantitatively to human data, we performed three experiments. In Experiments 1 and 2, we measured observers' perceptual uncertainty about stimulus positions and identities, respectively, for a target in isolation. In Experiment 3, observers identified a target that was flanked by two distractors. We found that about half of the errors in Experiment 3 could be accounted for by the perceptual uncertainty measured in Experiments 1 and 2. The remainder of the errors could be accounted for by assuming that uncertainty (i.e., the width of internal noise distribution) about stimulus positions and identities depends on flanker proximity. Our results provide a mathematical restatement of the crowding problem and support the hypothesis that crowding behavior is a sign of optimality rather than a perceptual defect.

[1]  D. Pelli,et al.  The uncrowded window of object recognition , 2008, Nature Neuroscience.

[2]  Steven C Dakin,et al.  Positional averaging explains crowding with letter-like stimuli , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[3]  David J. C. MacKay,et al.  Information Theory, Inference, and Learning Algorithms , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[4]  H. Strasburger Unfocused spatial attention underlies the crowding effect in indirect form vision. , 2004, Journal of vision.

[5]  Gordon E. Legge,et al.  Precision of position signals for letters , 2009, Vision Research.

[6]  H. Burian,et al.  A study of separation difficulty. Its relationship to visual acuity in normal and amblyopic eyes. , 1962, American journal of ophthalmology.

[7]  Y. Petrov,et al.  Crowding is directed to the fovea and preserves only feature contrast. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[8]  H. BOUMA,et al.  Interaction Effects in Parafoveal Letter Recognition , 1970, Nature.

[9]  Anirvan S. Nandy,et al.  The nature of letter crowding as revealed by first- and second-order classification images. , 2007, Journal of Vision.

[10]  Dennis M. Levi,et al.  Crowding in Peripheral Vision: Why Bigger Is Better , 2009, Current Biology.

[11]  D. Levi,et al.  The effect of similarity and duration on spatial interaction in peripheral vision. , 1994, Spatial vision.

[12]  Frans W Cornelissen,et al.  On the generality of crowding: visual crowding in size, saturation, and hue compared to orientation. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[13]  D. Pelli,et al.  Crowding is unlike ordinary masking: distinguishing feature integration from detection. , 2004, Journal of vision.

[14]  D. Levi,et al.  Visual crowding: a fundamental limit on conscious perception and object recognition , 2011, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[15]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[16]  P. Dayan,et al.  journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/visres Selective Bayes: Attentional load and crowding , 2022 .

[17]  Ian E. Holliday,et al.  The coding of spatial position by the human visual system: Effects of spatial scale and contrast , 1992, Vision Research.

[18]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Temporal properties of the polarity advantage effect in crowding. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[19]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Attentional resolution and the locus of visual awareness , 1996, Nature.

[20]  D. Levi Crowding—An essential bottleneck for object recognition: A mini-review , 2008, Vision Research.

[21]  Thomas A Carlson,et al.  Crowding is tuned for perceived (not physical) location. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[22]  S. Klein,et al.  Suppressive and facilitatory spatial interactions in amblyopic vision , 2002, Vision Research.

[23]  John Cass,et al.  Probabilistic, positional averaging predicts object-level crowding effects with letter-like stimuli. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[24]  Wei Ji Ma,et al.  Signal detection theory, uncertainty, and Poisson-like population codes , 2010, Vision Research.

[25]  D G Pelli,et al.  The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[26]  Susana T. L. Chung,et al.  Ideal observer analysis of crowding and the reduction of crowding through learning. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[27]  A. Faisal,et al.  Noise in the nervous system , 2008, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[28]  W. Korte,et al.  Über die Gestaltauffassung im indirekten Sehen , 1923 .

[29]  Jos B. T. M. Roerdink,et al.  A Neurophysiologically Plausible Population Code Model for Feature Integration Explains Visual Crowding , 2010, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[30]  Melchi M. Michel,et al.  Intrinsic position uncertainty explains detection and localization performance in peripheral vision. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[31]  Anke Huckauf,et al.  What various kinds of errors tell us about lateral masking effects , 2002 .

[32]  Denis G. Pelli,et al.  THE DESIGN OF A NEW LETTER CHART FOR MEASURING CONTRAST SENSITIVITY , 1988 .

[33]  S. Klein,et al.  Suppressive and facilitatory spatial interactions in peripheral vision: peripheral crowding is neither size invariant nor simple contrast masking. , 2002, Journal of vision.

[34]  Steven C. Dakin,et al.  Crowding Changes Appearance , 2010, Current Biology.

[35]  H. Bouma,et al.  Eccentric vision: Adverse interactions between line segments , 1976, Vision Research.