ArticleExperimental brain research2014
Familiar trajectories facilitate the interpretation of physical forces when intercepting a moving target.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychophysical evidence for an internal model of gravity in the visual and vestibular estimates of vertical motion duration.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Target interception in virtual reality is better for natural versus unnatural trajectory shapes and orientations.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Determining mean and standard deviation of the strong gravity prior through simulations.PloS one · 2020Article
- Rolling Motion Along an Incline: Visual Sensitivity to the Relation Between Acceleration and Slope.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2018Article
- Gravity as a Strong Prior: Implications for Perception and Action.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2017Article
- Hand interception of occluded motion in humans: a test of model-based vs. on-line control.Journal of neurophysiology · 2015Article
- Filling gaps in visual motion for target capture.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Familiarity with the visual environment affects our expectations about the objects in a scene, aiding in recognition and interaction. Here we tested whether the familiarity with the specific trajectory followed by a moving target facilitates the interpretation of the effects of underlying physical forces. Participants intercepted a target sliding down either an inclined plane or a tautochrone. Gravity accelerated the target by the same amount in both cases, but the inclined plane represented a familiar trajectory whereas the tautochrone was unfamiliar to the participants. In separate sessions, the gravity field was consistent with either natural gravity or artificial reversed gravity. Target motion was occluded from view over the last segment. We found that the responses in the session with unnatural forces were systematically delayed relative to those with natural forces, but only for the inclined plane. The time shift is consistent with a bias for natural gravity, in so far as it reflects an a priori expectation that a target not affected by natural forces will arrive later than one accelerated downwards by gravity. Instead, we did not find any significant time shift with unnatural forces in the case of the tautochrone. We argue that interception of a moving target relies on the integration of the high-level cue of trajectory familiarity with low-level cues related to target kinematics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25142150What 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.