From: Pooling of continuous features provides a unifying account of crowding Journal of Vision. 2016;16(3):39. doi:10.1167/16.3.39 Figure Legend: (A) Example stimulus from experiment 1 in Freeman et al. (2012), with two mongrels to its right used in our Experiment 1A. Mongrels are generated by iteratively enforcing image statistics on a random noise seed. Subjects were asked to report what three letters they believed the mongrel was generated from, free-viewing with no time limit. Notice that the mongrels show effects of substitution (swapping of letter positions), as well as complex interactions between letters. In agreement with Freeman et al. (2012), the flanker (A) more similar to the target (X) tends to be reproduced more faithfully in the mongrels than the dissimilar (S) flanker. (B) Original and mongrels for Freeman et al. (2012)'s experiment 2 (mongrels in our Experiment 1B). Interestingly, the letter “I” seems to appear in the mongrels, despite being absent in the original. (C) Subject reports of the similar flanker (first bar) compared to the dissimilar flanker (second bar), averaged across subjects, for both (left) Freeman et al. (2012) and (right) our Experiment 1A. Notice that in both studies, subjects reported the similar flanker significantly more often than the dissimilar (asterisk indicates p < 1 × 10−5; two-sided permutation test). (D) How often subjects mistakenly reported one of the identical flankers when they were similar (first bar) to or dissimilar (second bar) to the target, for both (left) Freeman et al. (2012)'s experiment 2 and (right) our Experiment 1B. Date of download: 11/4/2017 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology Copyright © 2017. All rights reserved.