Display options
Cite
Chaney W, Fischer J, Whitney D. The hierarchical sparse selection model of visual crowding. Front Integr Neurosci. 2014;8:73doi: 10.3389/fnint.2014.00073.
Chaney, W., Fischer, J., & Whitney, D. (2014). The hierarchical sparse selection model of visual crowding. Frontiers in integrative neuroscience, 873. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2014.00073
Chaney, Wesley, et al. "The hierarchical sparse selection model of visual crowding." Frontiers in integrative neuroscience vol. 8 (2014): 73. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2014.00073
Chaney W, Fischer J, Whitney D. The hierarchical sparse selection model of visual crowding. Front Integr Neurosci. 2014 Sep 25;8:73. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2014.00073. eCollection 2014. PMID: 25309360; PMCID: PMC4174752.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Front Integr Neurosci. 2014 Sep 25;8:73. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2014.00073. eCollection 2014.

The hierarchical sparse selection model of visual crowding.

Frontiers in integrative neuroscience

Wesley Chaney, Jason Fischer, David Whitney

Affiliations

  1. Vision Science Graduate Group, University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CA, USA.
  2. Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences and McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA, USA ; Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CA, USA.
  3. Vision Science Graduate Group, University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CA, USA ; Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CA, USA.

PMID: 25309360 PMCID: PMC4174752 DOI: 10.3389/fnint.2014.00073

Abstract

Because the environment is cluttered, objects rarely appear in isolation. The visual system must therefore attentionally select behaviorally relevant objects from among many irrelevant ones. A limit on our ability to select individual objects is revealed by the phenomenon of visual crowding: an object seen in the periphery, easily recognized in isolation, can become impossible to identify when surrounded by other, similar objects. The neural basis of crowding is hotly debated: while prevailing theories hold that crowded information is irrecoverable - destroyed due to over-integration in early stage visual processing - recent evidence demonstrates otherwise. Crowding can occur between high-level, configural object representations, and crowded objects can contribute with high precision to judgments about the "gist" of a group of objects, even when they are individually unrecognizable. While existing models can account for the basic diagnostic criteria of crowding (e.g., specific critical spacing, spatial anisotropies, and temporal tuning), no present model explains how crowding can operate simultaneously at multiple levels in the visual processing hierarchy, including at the level of whole objects. Here, we present a new model of visual crowding-the hierarchical sparse selection (HSS) model, which accounts for object-level crowding, as well as a number of puzzling findings in the recent literature. Counter to existing theories, we posit that crowding occurs not due to degraded visual representations in the brain, but due to impoverished sampling of visual representations for the sake of perception. The HSS model unifies findings from a disparate array of visual crowding studies and makes testable predictions about how information in crowded scenes can be accessed.

Keywords: attention; coarse coding; ensemble coding; neural network; perception; summary statistics; visual attention

References

  1. Neuropsychologia. 1987;25(1A):97-105 - PubMed
  2. J Neurosci. 2012 Jan 11;32(2):474-80 - PubMed
  3. Neuroimage. 2006 May 15;31(1):125-38 - PubMed
  4. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1988 Feb;14(1):101-12 - PubMed
  5. Nat Neurosci. 2011 Aug 14;14(9):1195-201 - PubMed
  6. Eur J Neurosci. 1995 Oct 1;7(10):2064-82 - PubMed
  7. Trends Cogn Sci. 2011 Apr;15(4):160-8 - PubMed
  8. J Neurosci. 1993 Mar;13(3):1202-26 - PubMed
  9. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2000 Nov;1(2):125-32 - PubMed
  10. Vision Res. 2007 Nov;47(25):3150-9 - PubMed
  11. J Vis. 2007 Jul 30;7(2):16.1-9 - PubMed
  12. Exp Brain Res. 2002 Jul;145(2):199-206 - PubMed
  13. Vision Res. 1976 Jan;16(1):71-8 - PubMed
  14. Science. 1995 May 12;268(5212):889-93 - PubMed
  15. J Neurophysiol. 2011 Sep;106(3):1389-98 - PubMed
  16. Nat Neurosci. 2008 Oct;11(10):1129-35 - PubMed
  17. J Vis. 2009 Jun 29;9(6):18.1-15 - PubMed
  18. J Neurosci. 2011 Sep 21;31(38):13604-12 - PubMed
  19. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Aug 4;106(31):13130-5 - PubMed
  20. J Neurosci. 2009 May 6;29(18):5749-57 - PubMed
  21. Biol Cybern. 1988;59(4-5):313-8 - PubMed
  22. Vision Res. 1992 Apr;32(4):771-7 - PubMed
  23. Science. 2007 Mar 30;315(5820):1860-2 - PubMed
  24. J Vis. 2010 Aug 01;10(10):14 - PubMed
  25. J Vis. 2007 Mar 06;7(2):8.1-9 - PubMed
  26. Biol Cybern. 1997 May;76(5):357-63 - PubMed
  27. Nat Commun. 2012;3:1051 - PubMed
  28. Cereb Cortex. 1997 Mar;7(2):181-92 - PubMed
  29. Psychol Rev. 1975 May;82(3):184-99 - PubMed
  30. Psychol Sci. 2011 Feb;22(2):184-9 - PubMed
  31. J Vis. 2011 May 25;11(6): - PubMed
  32. Brain Res. 1978 Mar 17;143(1):155-61 - PubMed
  33. J Vis. 2012 Jun 12;12(6):15 - PubMed
  34. J Vis. 2007 Nov 26;7(2):24.1-11 - PubMed
  35. Vision Res. 1992 Jul;32(7):1349-57 - PubMed
  36. J Vis. 2009 Oct 14;9(11):13.1-10 - PubMed
  37. J Vis. 2007 Apr 25;7(2):12.1-9 - PubMed
  38. Psychol Rev. 2006 Oct;113(4):766-86 - PubMed
  39. Perception. 2005;34(2):155-62 - PubMed
  40. J Neurophysiol. 2009 Nov;102(5):2704-18 - PubMed
  41. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2008 Aug;18(4):445-51 - PubMed
  42. Nat Neurosci. 2012 Jan 08;15(3):463-9, S1-2 - PubMed
  43. J Vis. 2009 Feb 06;9(2):5.1-11 - PubMed
  44. Nat Neurosci. 2005 Jan;8(1):99-106 - PubMed
  45. J Neurosci. 1995 Jun;15(6):4464-87 - PubMed
  46. J Neurosci. 1981 Sep;1(9):993-1002 - PubMed
  47. Nat Neurosci. 2007 Jun;10(6):685-6 - PubMed
  48. Vision Res. 2001 Jun;41(14):1833-50 - PubMed
  49. Psychol Sci. 2012 Jun;23(6):608-16 - PubMed
  50. J Vis. 2005 Feb 04;5(1):58-70 - PubMed
  51. Nat Neurosci. 2010 Sep;13(9):1144-9 - PubMed
  52. Vision Res. 2008 Feb;48(5):635-54 - PubMed
  53. Vision Res. 1973 Apr;13(4):767-82 - PubMed
  54. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2008 Feb;9(2):123-35 - PubMed
  55. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2004 Jan;30(1):181-97 - PubMed
  56. J Vis. 2009 Nov 19;9(12):13.1-18 - PubMed
  57. Neuron. 2013 May 8;78(3):554-62 - PubMed
  58. J Vis. 2012 Oct 22;12(11): - PubMed
  59. Curr Biol. 2005 May 10;15(9):R324-6 - PubMed
  60. J Comp Neurol. 2000 Oct 30;426(4):505-18 - PubMed
  61. Psychol Res. 1982;44(1):51-65 - PubMed
  62. J Vis. 2007 Jul 20;7(2):15.1-13 - PubMed
  63. Nature. 1996 Sep 26;383(6598):334-7 - PubMed
  64. Brain Res Rev. 2007 Oct;55(2):285-96 - PubMed
  65. Spat Vis. 1994;8(2):255-79 - PubMed
  66. J Cogn Neurosci. 2011 Jan;23(1):119-36 - PubMed
  67. Front Behav Neurosci. 2009 Nov 16;3:49 - PubMed
  68. Nat Neurosci. 2001 Jul;4(7):673-4 - PubMed
  69. J Vis. 2011 Mar 03;11(3): - PubMed
  70. J Vis. 2007 Feb 05;7(2):4.1-12 - PubMed
  71. Psychol Res. 2007 Nov;71(6):641-5 - PubMed
  72. Exp Brain Res. 2004 Oct;158(3):373-7 - PubMed

Publication Types