Fig. 3.

Relationships between object size maps, numerosity maps, and visual field maps. (A) Numerosity preferences in the same areas as Fig. 2 form numerosity maps (solid black and white lines) that largely overlap with object size maps (dashed black and white lines). Left hemisphere numerosity maps are less clear than right, and represent a smaller numerosity range. Object size maps are similar bilaterally. (B) Among recording sites that lie in both maps, object size and numerosity preferences are correlated. The ratio of these preferences differs between hemispheres. (C) IPS visual field maps partially overlap with object size and numerosity maps. Object size- and numerosity-tuned responses were not limited to the central visual field positions where their stimuli were presented. Visual field map borders did not coincide with object size or numerosity map borders. (D) Among the fewer recording sites that lie in both visual field maps and object size or numerosity maps, neither object size nor numerosity preferences were correlated with pRF eccentricity or pRF size.