Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23732217›Full record

ArticleVision research2013

The company they keep: background similarity influences transfer of aftereffects from second- to first-order stimuli.

Ning Qian, Peter Dayan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vision research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Visual perception as retrospective Bayesian decoding from high- to low-level features.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ning QianDepartment of Neuroscience, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA. nq6@columbia.edu
Peter Dayan

Funding

Instrumentation, Fabrication, and Design CoreP30EY019007 · NEI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Xin Zhang · 2010 to 2026
$12.9M
Computation and Psychophysics of Motion and StereopsisR01EY016270 · NEI · NEW YORK STATE PSYCHIATRIC INSTITUTE DBA RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR MENTAL HYGIENE, INC · PI QIAN, NING · 2006 to 2009
$1.3M
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/E002536/1NEI NIH HHS EY016270NEI NIH HHS P30 EY019007NEI NIH HHS R01 EY016270Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust BB/E002536/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A wealth of studies has found that adapting to second-order visual stimuli has little effect on the perception of first-order stimuli. This is physiologically and psychologically troubling, since many cells show similar tuning to both classes of stimuli, and since adapting to first-order stimuli leads to aftereffects that do generalize to second-order stimuli. Focusing on high-level visual stimuli, we recently proposed the novel explanation that the lack of transfer arises partially from the characteristically different backgrounds of the two stimulus classes. Here, we consider the effect of stimulus backgrounds in the far more prevalent, lower-level, case of the orientation tilt aftereffect. Using a variety of first- and second-order oriented stimuli, we show that we could increase or decrease both within- and cross-class adaptation aftereffects by increasing or decreasing the similarity of the otherwise apparently uninteresting or irrelevant backgrounds of adapting and test patterns. Our results suggest that similarity between background statistics of the adapting and test stimuli contributes to low-level visual adaptation, and that these backgrounds are thus not discarded by visual processing but provide contextual modulation of adaptation. Null cross-adaptation aftereffects must also be interpreted cautiously. These findings reduce the apparent inconsistency between psychophysical and neurophysiological data about first- and second-order stimuli.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PhysiologicalFigural AftereffectHumansIllusionsPattern Recognition, VisualPhotic StimulationVisual Perception

Identifiers

PMID23732217
PMCPMC3760381

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.