ArticlePeerJ2014
The perception of shape from shading in a new light.
Article in PeerJ, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anticlockwise or clockwise? A dynamic Perception-Action-Laterality model for directionality bias in visuospatial functioning.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2016Review
- Reference Frames and 3-D Shape Perception of Pictured Objects: On Verticality and Viewpoint-From-Above.i-Perception · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
How do humans see three-dimensional shape based on two-dimensional shading? Much research has assumed that a 'light from above' bias solves the ambiguity of shape from shading. Counter to the 'light from above' bias, studies of Bayesian priors have found that such a bias can be swayed by other light cues. Despite the persuasive power of the Bayesian models, many new studies and books cite the original 'light from above' findings. Here I present a version of the Bayesian result that can be experienced. The perception of shape-from-shading was found here to be influenced by an external light source, even when the light was obstructed and did not directly illuminate a two-dimensional stimulus. The results imply that this effect is robust and not low-level in nature. The perception of shape from shading is not necessarily based on a hard-wired internal representation of lighting direction, but rather assesses the direction of lighting in the scene adaptively. Here, for the first time, is an experiential opportunity to see what the Bayesian models have supported all along.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.