Suppr超能文献

黄斑与周边轮廓相互作用和拥挤的比较。

A Comparison of Foveal and Peripheral Contour Interaction and Crowding.

机构信息

College of Optometry, University of Houston, Houston, Texas.

出版信息

Optom Vis Sci. 2021 Jan 1;98(1):41-50. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001625.

Abstract

SIGNIFICANCE

Performance on clinical tests of visual acuity can be influenced by the presence of nearby targets. This study compared the influence of neighboring flanking bars and letters on foveal and peripheral letter identification.

PURPOSE

Contour interaction and crowding refer to an impairment of visual resolution or discrimination produced by different types of flanking stimuli. This study compared the impairment of percent correct letter identification that is produced in normal observers when a target letter is surrounded by an array of four flanking bars (contour interaction) or four flanking letters (crowding).

METHODS

Performance was measured at the fovea and at eccentricities of 1.25, 2.5, and 5° for photopic (200 cd/m2) and mesopic stimuli (0.5 cd/m2) and a range of target-to-flanker separations.

RESULTS

Consistent with previous reports, foveal contour interaction and crowding were more pronounced for photopic than mesopic targets. However, no statistically significant difference existed between foveal contour-interaction and crowding functions at either luminance level. On the other hand, flanking bars produced much less impairment of letter identification than letter flankers at all three peripheral locations, indicating that crowding is more severe than contour interaction in peripheral vision. In contrast to the fovea, peripheral crowding and contour-interaction functions did not differ systematically for targets of photopic and mesopic luminance.

CONCLUSION

The similarity between foveal contour interaction and crowding and the dissimilarity between peripheral contour interaction and crowding suggest the involvement of different mechanisms at different retinal locations.

摘要

意义

视力临床测试的表现可能会受到附近目标的影响。本研究比较了相邻边框和字母对中心凹和周边字母识别的影响。

目的

轮廓交互和拥挤是指不同类型的边框刺激引起的视觉分辨率或辨别力的损害。本研究比较了在正常观察者中,当目标字母被四个边框(轮廓交互)或四个边框字母(拥挤)包围时,正确识别字母的百分比会受到怎样的损害。

方法

在中心凹和偏心 1.25、2.5 和 5°处,对明视(200 cd/m2)和中间视觉(0.5 cd/m2)刺激以及一系列目标到边框的分离距离进行了性能测量。

结果

与之前的报告一致,明视目标的中心凹轮廓交互和拥挤比中间视觉目标更为明显。然而,在这两个亮度水平下,中心凹的轮廓交互和拥挤功能之间没有统计学上的显著差异。另一方面,在所有三个周边位置,边框都比字母边框对字母识别的损害要小得多,这表明在周边视觉中拥挤比轮廓交互更为严重。与中心凹不同,周边的拥挤和轮廓交互功能对于明视和中间视觉目标的亮度没有系统差异。

结论

中心凹的轮廓交互和拥挤相似,而周边的轮廓交互和拥挤不同,这表明在不同的视网膜位置涉及不同的机制。

相似文献

1
A Comparison of Foveal and Peripheral Contour Interaction and Crowding.
Optom Vis Sci. 2021 Jan 1;98(1):41-50. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001625.
2
Technical Report: The Mechanism of Contour Interaction Differs in the Fovea and Periphery.
Optom Vis Sci. 2020 Dec;97(12):1053-1060. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001615.
3
Contour interaction for foveal acuity targets at different luminances.
Vision Res. 2013 Aug 30;89:90-5. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2013.07.009. Epub 2013 Jul 20.
4
Number of flankers influences foveal crowding and contour interaction differently.
Vision Res. 2021 Feb;179:9-18. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2020.11.002. Epub 2020 Nov 30.
6
Foveal contour interaction for low contrast acuity targets.
Vision Res. 2013 Jan 25;77:10-3. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2012.11.008. Epub 2012 Nov 29.
7
Grouping Effects on Foveal Spatial Interactions in Children.
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2020 May 11;61(5):23. doi: 10.1167/iovs.61.5.23.
8
Foveal crowding differs in children and adults.
J Vis. 2014 Oct 23;14(12):23. doi: 10.1167/14.12.23.

引用本文的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验