Anisotropies in global stereoscopic orientation discrimination

Mustillo, Pardo; Francis, Ellie L.; Oross, Stephen; Fox, Robert; Orban, Guy A.

doi:10.1016/0042-6989(88)90063-6

Cited by 24 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Researchers in these two areas have shown that stimuli oriented cardinally are perceived more precisely than those oriented obliquely. Thus our performances in contrast sensitivity (Campbell & Kulikowski, 1966; Mitchell, Freeman, & Westheimer, 1967), stereoacuity (Mustillo, Francis, Oross, Fox, & Orban, 1988), grating acuity (Berkley, Kitterle, & Watkins, 1975; Campbell, Kulikowski, & Levinson, 1966; Furmanski & Engel, 2000), and vernier acuity (Corwin, Moskowitz-Cook, & Green, 1977; Saarinen & Levi, 1995; Westheimer & Beard, 1998) are better at the cardinal than oblique orientation. One hypothesis is that this sort of asymmetry, often termed the oblique effect (Appelle, 1972), occurs because more V1 (primary visual/striate cortex) cells are devoted to the cardinal than oblique orientations (Furmanski & Engel, 2000; Li, Peterson, & Freeman, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Anticlockwise or clockwise? A dynamic Perception-Action-Laterality model for directionality bias in visuospatial functioning

Karim

Proulx

Likova

2016

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reviewing the relevant literature in visual psychophysics and visual neuroscience we propose a three-stage model of directionality bias in visuospatial functioning. We call this model the ‘Perception-Action-Laterality’ (PAL) hypothesis. We analyzed the research findings for a wide range of visuospatial tasks, showing that there are two major directionality trends: clockwise versus anticlockwise. It appears these preferences are combinatorial, such that a majority of people fall in the first category demonstrating a preference for stimuli/objects arranged from left-to-right rather than from right-to-left, while people in the second category show an opposite trend. These perceptual biases can guide sensorimotor integration and action, creating two corresponding turner groups in the population. In support of PAL, we propose another model explaining the origins of the biases– how the neurogenetic factors and the cultural factors interact in a biased competition framework to determine the direction and extent of biases. This dynamic model can explain not only the two major categories of biases, but also the unbiased, unreliably biased or mildly biased cases in visuosptial functioning.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Anticlockwise or clockwise? A dynamic Perception-Action-Laterality model for directionality bias in visuospatial functioning

Karim

Proulx

Likova

2016

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Specifically, psychophysical studies have shown that performance is better at the cardinal than the oblique orientation in contrast sensitivity (Campbell & Kulikowski, 1966; Mitchell et al, 1967), stereoacuity (Mustillo, Francis, Oross, Fox, & Orban, 1988), grating acuity (Berkley, Kitterle, & Watkins, 1975; Campbell et al, 1966), and vernier acuity (Corwin, Moskowitz-Cook, & Green, 1977; Saarinen & Levi, 1995; Westheimer & Beard, 1998). This fact, often referred to as the oblique effect (Appelle, 1972), is most prominent in central vision (e.g., Berkley et al, 1975; Mansfield, 1974).…”

Section: The What and Primary Why Of The Within-visual Field Asymmentioning

confidence: 99%

The <i>what</i> and <i>why</i> of perceptual asymmetries in the visual domain

Karim

Kojima

2010

Advances in Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perceptual asymmetry is one of the most important characteristics of our visual functioning. We carefully reviewed the scientific literature in order to examine such asymmetries, separating them into two major categories: within-visual field asymmetries and between-visual field asymmetries. We explain these asymmetries in terms of perceptual aspects or tasks, the what of the asymmetries; and in terms of underlying mechanisms, the why of the asymmetries. Tthe within-visual field asymmetries are fundamental to orientation, motion direction, and spatial frequency processing. between-visual field asymmetries have been reported for a wide range of perceptual phenomena. foveal dominance over the periphery, in particular, has been prominent for visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and colour discrimination. Tthis also holds true for object or face recognition and reading performance. upper-lower visual field asymmetries in favour of the lower have been demonstrated for temporal and contrast sensitivities, visual acuity, spatial resolution, orientation, hue and motion processing. Iin contrast, the upper field advantages have been seen in visual search, apparent size, and object recognition tasks. left-right visual field asymmetries include the left field dominance in spatial (e.g., orientation) processing and the right field dominance in non-spatial (e.g., temporal) processing. left field is also better at low spatial frequency or global and coordinate spatial processing, whereas the right field is better at high spatial frequency or local and categorical spatial processing. All these asymmetries have inborn neural/physiological origins, the primary why, but can be also susceptible to visual experience, the critical why (promotes or blocks the asymmetries by altering neural functions).

show abstract

“…The evidence for this possibility has been reviewed by Howard (1982) and related issues have been discussed by Orban et aI. (1984), Mustillo, Francis, Oross, Fox, and Orban (1988), and Heeley and Buchanan-Smith (1990).…”

Section: Modulation Of Angular Induction 647mentioning

confidence: 99%

Angular induction is modulated by the orientation of the test segment but not its length

Greene

1993

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Angular induction is the basic process by which the orientation of line segments can affect the perceived orientation of other segments as well as their alignment. In this laboratory, we have found that the effect on alignment follows approximately linear rules, with the inducing segment having its greatest influence when its orientation is near to that of the segment being judged. Other laboratories, however, have reported peak effects when the relative angle between the two is at 45 0 , and with the inducing segment being aligned with one of the cardinal axes of the observer. It has been said that the length of the test segment being judged is a critical factor, but the first experiment of the present study shows a similar linear decline of induction strength irrespective of test segment length. The second experiment indicates that the orientation of the test segment relative to the observer modulates the induction to determine the location of peak effects. A two-factor linear model predicts the observed pattern of results.

show abstract

Anisotropies in global stereoscopic orientation discrimination

Cited by 24 publications

References 29 publications

Anticlockwise or clockwise? A dynamic Perception-Action-Laterality model for directionality bias in visuospatial functioning

Anticlockwise or clockwise? A dynamic Perception-Action-Laterality model for directionality bias in visuospatial functioning

The <i>what</i> and <i>why</i> of perceptual asymmetries in the visual domain

Angular induction is modulated by the orientation of the test segment but not its length

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About