Skip to main content
Log in

Discrimination of Image Orientation in the Presence of Distractors

  • Published:
Human Physiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We studied the influence of additional images (distractors) on the recognition of test objects, which included low-contrast Landolt circles with sizes of 1.1, 1.5, and 2.2 angular degrees and were presented eccentrically at 13.2 degrees from fixation. The distractors were either Landolt Cs or full circles with the same spatial characteristics. The distance between the test objects and the distractors varied from 2.2 to 24.2 angular degrees. The subjects were required to report the orientation of the tests (simple task) or to report the orientation of the tests and the shape of the distractor (dual task). The first group of subjects performed both simple and dual tasks, while the second group only performed the simple task. A significant deterioration of performance was recorded at all tested separations in both tasks; it was more pronounced in the dual task. The percent of correct responses was lower when Landolt circles were distractors as compared with full circles. The subjects tended to report the orientation of the distractors instead of tests in the cases of small and large separations. The recognition of distractors was also performed at a lower level in the cases of small and large distances. The data show that attention contributes to the task performance in two ways: the features of tests and distractors are integrated, or the tests are substituted by distractors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Atkinson, J., Review of human visual development: crowding and dyslexia, in Vision and Visual Dyslexia, London: Macmillan, 1991, p.44.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Flom, M.C., Contour interaction and the crowding effect, Probl. Optom., 1991, vol. 3, no. 2, p.237.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Pelli, D.G., Palomares, M., and Majaj, N.J., Crowding is unlike ordinary masking: distinguishing feature detection and integration, J. Vision, 2004, vol. 4, p. 1136.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Strasburger, H., Unfocussed spatial attention underlies the crowding effect in indirect form vision, J. Vision, 2005, vol. 5, no. 11, p. 1024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Danilova, M V. and Bondarko, V.M., Foveal contour interactions and crowding effects at the resolution limit of the visual system, J. Vision, 2007, vol. 7, no. 2, p.1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Levi, D.M., Crowding—an essential bottleneck for object recognition: a mini review, Vision Res., 2008, vol. 48, p.635.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Bouma, H., Interaction effects in parafoveal letter recognition, Nature, 1970, vol. 226, no. 5241, p.177.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Strasburger, H., Rentchler, I., and Jüttner, M., Peripheral vision and pattern recognition: a review, J. Vision, 2011, vol. 11, no. 5, p.1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bondarko, V.M., Danilova, M.V., Solnushkin, S.D., and Chikhman, V.N., Estimation of the sizes of inhibitory areas in crowding effect in the periphery, Hum. Physiol., 2014, vol. 40, no. 3, p.244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bondarko, V.M., Danilova, M.V., Solnushkin, S.D., and Chikhman, V.N., The effect of additional images on recognition of peripheral stimulus, Sens. Sist., 2014, vol. 28, no. 2, p.3.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Strasburger, H., Harvey, L.O., and Rentchler, I., Contrast thresholds for identification of numeric characters in direct and eccentric view, Percept. Psychophys., 1991, vol. 49, p.495.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Hanus, D. and Vul, E., Quantifying error distributions in crowding, J. Vision, 2013, vol. 13, no. 4, p.1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Freeman, J., Chakravarthi, R., and Pelli, D., Substitution and pooling in crowding, Atten. Percept. Psychophys., 2012, vol. 74, p.379.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Treisman, A., Strategies and models of selective attention, Psychol. Rev., 1969, vol. 76, p.282.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Treisman, A. and Gelade, G., A feature-integration theory of attention, Cognit. Psychol., 1980, vol. 12, p.97.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Harrison, W.J. and Bex, P.J., A unifying model of orientation crowding in peripheral vision, Curr. Biol., 2015, vol. 25, p. 3213.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. M. Bondarko.

Additional information

Original Russian Text © V.M. Bondarko, M.V. Danilova, S.D. Solnushkin, V.N. Chikhman, 2018, published in Fiziologiya Cheloveka, 2018, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 16–25.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bondarko, V.M., Danilova, M.V., Solnushkin, S.D. et al. Discrimination of Image Orientation in the Presence of Distractors. Hum Physiol 44, 371–379 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0362119718020044

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S0362119718020044

Keywords

Navigation