Isoeccentric locations are not equivalent: The extent of the vertical meridian asymmetry

Jared Abrams, Aaron Nizam, Marisa Carrasco

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Performance in visual tasks is limited by the low-level mechanisms that sample the visual field. It is well documented that contrast sensitivity and spatial resolution decrease as a function of eccentricity and that those factors impair performance in "higher level" tasks, such as visual search. Performance also varies consistently at isoeccentric locations in the visual field. Specifically, at a fixed eccentricity, performance is better along the horizontal meridian than the vertical meridian, and along the lower than the upper vertical meridian. Whether these asymmetries in visual performance fields are confined to the vertical meridian or extend across the whole upper versus lower visual hemifield has been a matter of debate. Here, we measure the extent of the upper versus lower asymmetry. Results reveal that this asymmetry is most pronounced at the vertical meridian and that it decreases gradually as the angular distance (polar angle) from the vertical meridian increases, with eccentricity held constant. Beyond 30° of polar angle from the vertical meridian, the upper to lower asymmetry is no longer reliable. Thus, the vertical meridian is uniquely asymmetric and uniquely insensitive. This pattern of results is consistent with early anatomical properties of the visual system and reflects constraints that are critical to our understanding of visual information processing.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)70-78
Number of pages9
JournalVision Research
Volume52
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2012

Fingerprint

Meridians
Visual Fields
Contrast Sensitivity
Automatic Data Processing

Keywords

  • Contrast sensitivity
  • Horizontal vertical anisotropy
  • Performance fields
  • Spatial vision
  • Upper versus lower asymmetry
  • Vertical meridian asymmetry

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology
  • Sensory Systems

Cite this

Isoeccentric locations are not equivalent : The extent of the vertical meridian asymmetry. / Abrams, Jared; Nizam, Aaron; Carrasco, Marisa.

In: Vision Research, Vol. 52, No. 1, 01.01.2012, p. 70-78.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abrams, Jared ; Nizam, Aaron ; Carrasco, Marisa. / Isoeccentric locations are not equivalent : The extent of the vertical meridian asymmetry. In: Vision Research. 2012 ; Vol. 52, No. 1. pp. 70-78.
@article{1b51c256b0e54c5b985f162c47e5ee20,
title = "Isoeccentric locations are not equivalent: The extent of the vertical meridian asymmetry",
abstract = "Performance in visual tasks is limited by the low-level mechanisms that sample the visual field. It is well documented that contrast sensitivity and spatial resolution decrease as a function of eccentricity and that those factors impair performance in {"}higher level{"} tasks, such as visual search. Performance also varies consistently at isoeccentric locations in the visual field. Specifically, at a fixed eccentricity, performance is better along the horizontal meridian than the vertical meridian, and along the lower than the upper vertical meridian. Whether these asymmetries in visual performance fields are confined to the vertical meridian or extend across the whole upper versus lower visual hemifield has been a matter of debate. Here, we measure the extent of the upper versus lower asymmetry. Results reveal that this asymmetry is most pronounced at the vertical meridian and that it decreases gradually as the angular distance (polar angle) from the vertical meridian increases, with eccentricity held constant. Beyond 30° of polar angle from the vertical meridian, the upper to lower asymmetry is no longer reliable. Thus, the vertical meridian is uniquely asymmetric and uniquely insensitive. This pattern of results is consistent with early anatomical properties of the visual system and reflects constraints that are critical to our understanding of visual information processing.",
keywords = "Contrast sensitivity, Horizontal vertical anisotropy, Performance fields, Spatial vision, Upper versus lower asymmetry, Vertical meridian asymmetry",
author = "Jared Abrams and Aaron Nizam and Marisa Carrasco",
year = "2012",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.visres.2011.10.016",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "52",
pages = "70--78",
journal = "Vision Research",
issn = "0042-6989",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Isoeccentric locations are not equivalent

T2 - The extent of the vertical meridian asymmetry

AU - Abrams, Jared

AU - Nizam, Aaron

AU - Carrasco, Marisa

PY - 2012/1/1

Y1 - 2012/1/1

N2 - Performance in visual tasks is limited by the low-level mechanisms that sample the visual field. It is well documented that contrast sensitivity and spatial resolution decrease as a function of eccentricity and that those factors impair performance in "higher level" tasks, such as visual search. Performance also varies consistently at isoeccentric locations in the visual field. Specifically, at a fixed eccentricity, performance is better along the horizontal meridian than the vertical meridian, and along the lower than the upper vertical meridian. Whether these asymmetries in visual performance fields are confined to the vertical meridian or extend across the whole upper versus lower visual hemifield has been a matter of debate. Here, we measure the extent of the upper versus lower asymmetry. Results reveal that this asymmetry is most pronounced at the vertical meridian and that it decreases gradually as the angular distance (polar angle) from the vertical meridian increases, with eccentricity held constant. Beyond 30° of polar angle from the vertical meridian, the upper to lower asymmetry is no longer reliable. Thus, the vertical meridian is uniquely asymmetric and uniquely insensitive. This pattern of results is consistent with early anatomical properties of the visual system and reflects constraints that are critical to our understanding of visual information processing.

AB - Performance in visual tasks is limited by the low-level mechanisms that sample the visual field. It is well documented that contrast sensitivity and spatial resolution decrease as a function of eccentricity and that those factors impair performance in "higher level" tasks, such as visual search. Performance also varies consistently at isoeccentric locations in the visual field. Specifically, at a fixed eccentricity, performance is better along the horizontal meridian than the vertical meridian, and along the lower than the upper vertical meridian. Whether these asymmetries in visual performance fields are confined to the vertical meridian or extend across the whole upper versus lower visual hemifield has been a matter of debate. Here, we measure the extent of the upper versus lower asymmetry. Results reveal that this asymmetry is most pronounced at the vertical meridian and that it decreases gradually as the angular distance (polar angle) from the vertical meridian increases, with eccentricity held constant. Beyond 30° of polar angle from the vertical meridian, the upper to lower asymmetry is no longer reliable. Thus, the vertical meridian is uniquely asymmetric and uniquely insensitive. This pattern of results is consistent with early anatomical properties of the visual system and reflects constraints that are critical to our understanding of visual information processing.

KW - Contrast sensitivity

KW - Horizontal vertical anisotropy

KW - Performance fields

KW - Spatial vision

KW - Upper versus lower asymmetry

KW - Vertical meridian asymmetry

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84455208130&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84455208130&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.visres.2011.10.016

DO - 10.1016/j.visres.2011.10.016

M3 - Article

VL - 52

SP - 70

EP - 78

JO - Vision Research

JF - Vision Research

SN - 0042-6989

IS - 1

ER -