↓ Skip to main content

A decisional account of subjective inflation of visual perception at the periphery

Overview of attention for article published in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
Title
A decisional account of subjective inflation of visual perception at the periphery
Published in
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, September 2014
DOI 10.3758/s13414-014-0769-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guillermo Solovey, Guy Gerard Graney, Hakwan Lau

Abstract

Human peripheral vision appears vivid compared to foveal vision; the subjectively perceived level of detail does not seem to drop abruptly with eccentricity. This compelling impression contrasts with the fact that spatial resolution is substantially lower at the periphery. A similar phenomenon occurs in visual attention, in which subjects usually overestimate their perceptual capacity in the unattended periphery. We have previously shown that at identical eccentricity, low spatial attention is associated with liberal detection biases, which we argue may reflect inflated subjective perceptual qualities. Our computational model suggests that this subjective inflation occurs because under the lack of attention, the trial-by-trial variability of the internal neural response is increased, resulting in more frequent surpassing of a detection criterion. In the current work, we hypothesized that the same mechanism may be at work in peripheral vision. We investigated this possibility in psychophysical experiments in which participants performed a simultaneous detection task at the center and at the periphery. Confirming our hypothesis, we found that participants adopted a conservative criterion at the center and liberal criterion at the periphery. Furthermore, an extension of our model predicts that detection bias will be similar at the center and at the periphery if the periphery stimuli are magnified. A second experiment successfully confirmed this prediction. These results suggest that, although other factors contribute to subjective inflation of visual perception in the periphery, such as top-down filling-in of information, the decision mechanism may be relevant too.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Argentina 1 2%
Unknown 61 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 30%
Researcher 13 21%
Student > Master 10 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Student > Postgraduate 2 3%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 10 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 28 44%
Philosophy 6 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Computer Science 3 5%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 15 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 September 2016.
All research outputs
#7,977,154
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#429
of 1,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,067
of 255,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#7
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
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 255,847 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.