ArticlePloS one2014
Separating fusion from rivalry.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- An investigation into the correlation between visual performance in simulated complex environments and academic attainment among primary school students.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Visual consciousness dynamics in adults with and without autism.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Visual fusion is the process in which differing but compatible binocular information is transformed into a unified percept. Even though this is at the basis of binocular vision, the underlying neural processes are, as yet, poorly understood. In our study we therefore aimed to investigate neural correlates of visual fusion. To this end, we presented binocularly compatible, fusible (BF), and incompatible, rivaling (BR) stimuli, as well as an intermediate stimulus type containing both binocularly fusible and monocular, incompatible elements (BFR). Comparing BFR stimuli with BF and BR stimuli, respectively, we were able to disentangle brain responses associated with either visual fusion or rivalry. By means of functional magnetic resonance imaging, we measured brain responses to these stimulus classes in the visual cortex, and investigated them in detail at various retinal eccentricities. Compared with BF stimuli, the response to BFR stimuli was elevated in visual cortical areas V1 and V2, but not in V3 and V4 - implying that the response to monocular stimulus features decreased from V1 to V4. Compared to BR stimuli, the response to BFR stimuli decreased with increasing eccentricity, specifically within V3 and V4. Taken together, it seems that although the processing of exclusively monocular information decreases from V1 to V4, the processing of binocularly fused information increases from earlier to later visual areas. Our findings suggest the presence of an inhibitory neural mechanism which, depending on the presence of fusion, acts differently on the processing of monocular information.
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.