Human visual perception varies as a function of stimulus location.

Does the adult visual cortex represent space differently than that of a child?

“Comparing retinotopic maps of children and adults reveals a late-stage change in how V1 samples the visual field”
by Marc Himmelberg, Ekin Tünçok, Jesse Gomez, Kalanit Grill-Spector, Marisa Carrasco and Jonathan Winawer
published in Nature Communications

A fascinating discovery from my PhD research revealed how children's brains organize visual space differently than adults. Using brain imaging, we found that while many aspects of visual processing are remarkably mature by early childhood, there's one crucial difference that emerges later in development.

Both adults and children show better visual performance for stimuli along the horizontal than vertical meridian of the visual field. Adults show better visual performance for stimuli at the lower than the upper vertical meridian, but not children. We found that the horizontal-vertical asymmetry that is present in both adults and children is matched by how much brain tissue is dedicated to processing these regions in early visual cortex. Strikingly, adult humans but not children show a cortical asymmetry between the lower and upper vertical meridian locations — in line with behavioral performance observed in these age groups!

This means that even though most of the visual system looks adult-like by childhood, there's a large, late-stage change in how V1 samples the visual field that parallels the emergence of a vertical meridian asymmetry in visual performance by adulthood.

This finding suggests that our brains continue to adapt to the demands of our visual environment well into development—perhaps reflecting how children and adults navigate and interact with the world differently.

Does visual performance vary by location similarly in macaque monkeys and humans?

“Opposite asymmetry in visual perception of humans and macaques”
by Ekin Tünçok, Lynne Kiorpes and Marisa Carrasco
published in Current Biology

One of the most interesting discoveries from my PhD research was finding that humans and our close evolutionary relatives see the world differently. While we both have spatial 'blind spots' and strengths in our vision, they're actually in opposite locations.

When we tested motion perception across the visual field in humans versus macaque monkeys, we discovered that humans show the lowest perceptual sensitivity around the upper vertical meridian from their gaze position, while the macaque performance is the poorest around the lower vertical meridian location from their gaze! This was surprising because for decades, researchers have used macaque monkeys as models for human vision, assuming our visual systems work similarly.

This finding suggests that different evolutionary pressures shaped how humans and macaques process visual information. Perhaps our upright posture and walking behavior led to different environmental statistics in the lower parts of our visual field, while macaques' arboreal lifestyle favored upper visual field processing for detecting threats and navigating climbing.

When you're anticipating to see something important, your brain doesn't just sit idle—it actively reshapes how it processes visual information across your entire field of view in accordance with your anticipations, and this comes with real costs.

We've known for decades from behavioral studies that attention involves behavioral tradeoffs: focusing on one location improves what you see there but impairs perception elsewhere. But how does the brain implement these benefits and costs before a target even appears?

To answer this, we designed a neuroimaging experiment that combined brain imaging with a visual discrimination task. Critically, we included a condition where participants were instructed to monitor multiple locations simultaneously (distributed attention), which allowed us to measure the visual cortex responses at where participants attended and unattended compared to attending ‘everywhere’. When people focused on a single location, their performance more than doubled compared to distributed attention. But performance at unattended locations didn't just stay neutral—it dropped to barely above chance.

Visual cortex activity strongly reflected these behavioral changes: neural responses increased at the attended location and actively decreased at unattended locations, mirroring the behavioral pattern. This suppression became stronger in higher-level visual areas. Even more striking, these changes were happening during the anticipation period—your brain was already reconfiguring before anything appeared on the screen.

This finding reveals that our attentional capacity cannot "turn up the volume" everywhere. Focusing somewhere means actively withdrawing neural resources from everywhere else, with measurable consequences for what you can perceive. This has important implications for designing systems—from cockpit displays to video games—that need to work with the fundamental limits of human attention.

The visual world contains far more information than we can process. Attention enables us to selectively prioritize what matters.

How does the brain prepare to pay attention before anything appears?

“Spatial attention selectively alters visual cortical representation during target anticipation”
by Ekin Tünçok, Marisa Carrasco and Jonathan Winawer
published in Nature Communications