Grouping, pooling, and when bigger is better in visual crowding

M. Manassi, Bilge Sayim, M.H. Herzog

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

120 Citations (Scopus)


In crowding, perception of a target is strongly deteriorated by nearby elements. Crowding is often explained by pooling models predicting that adding flankers increases crowding. In contrast, the centroid hypothesis proposes that adding flankers decreases crowding—‘‘bigger is better.’’ In foveal vision, we have recently shown that adding flankers can increase or decrease crowding depending on whether the target groups or ungroups from the flankers. We have further shown how configural effects, such as good and global Gestalt, determine crowding. Foveal and peripheral crowding do not always reveal the same characteristics. Here, we show that the very same grouping and Gestalt results of foveal vision are also found in the periphery. These results can neither be explained by simple pooling nor by centroid models. We discuss when bigger is better and how grouping might shape crowding.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-14
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of Vision
Issue number13
Publication statusPublished - Sept 2012

Bibliographical note

We would like to thank Keith May and two anonymous reviewers for their useful comments on this manuscript. We thank Marc Repnow for technical support. This work was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) Project ‘‘Basics of visual processing: What crowds in crowding?’’


  • crowding
  • vernier acuity
  • perceptual organization
  • grouping


Dive into the research topics of 'Grouping, pooling, and when bigger is better in visual crowding'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this