↓ Skip to main content

Radial-tangential anisotropy of crowding in the early visual areas

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurophysiology, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Radial-tangential anisotropy of crowding in the early visual areas
Published in
Journal of Neurophysiology, August 2014
DOI 10.1152/jn.00476.2014
Pubmed ID
Authors

MiYoung Kwon, Pinglei Bao, Rachel Millin, Bosco S Tjan

Abstract

Crowding, the inability to recognize an individual object in clutter (Bouma, 1970), is considered a major impediment to object recognition in peripheral vision. Despite its significance, the cortical loci of crowding are not well understood. In particular, the role of the primary visual cortex (V1) remains unclear. Here, we utilize a diagnostic feature of crowding to identify the earliest cortical locus of crowding. Controlling for other factors, radially arranged flankers induce more crowding than tangentially arranged ones (Toet and Levi, 1992). We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to measure the change in mean blood-oxygenation-level-dependent (BOLD) response due to the addition of a middle letter between a pair of radially or tangentially arranged flankers. Consistent with the previous finding that crowding was associated with a reduced BOLD response (Millin et al, 2013), we found that the BOLD signal evoked by the middle letter depended on the arrangement of the flankers: less BOLD response was associated with adding the middle letter between radially arranged flankers as compared to adding it between tangentially arranged ones. This anisotropy in BOLD response was present as early as in V1 and remained significant in downstream areas. The effect was observed while subjects' attention was diverted away from the testing stimuli. Contrast detection threshold for the middle letter was unaffected by flanker arrangement, ruling out surround suppression of contrast response as a major factor in the observed BOLD anisotropy. Our findings support the view that V1 contributes to crowding.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 18%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 7 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 51%
Neuroscience 10 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 7 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 November 2014.
All research outputs
#19,945,185
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurophysiology
#5,871
of 8,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,706
of 243,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurophysiology
#60
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,423 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 243,102 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.