ArticleFrontiers in psychology2015
Visual duration aftereffect is position invariant.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Studying the aftereffect and changes in sensitivity to physical and mental time references using a time adaptation paradigm.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The neural link between stimulus duration and spatial location in the human visual hierarchy.Nature communications · 2024Article
- A purely visual adaptation to motion can differentiate between perceptual timing and interval timing.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Modality-specific sensory and decisional carryover effects in duration perception.BMC biology · 2023Article
- Visual timing-tuned responses in human association cortices and response dynamics in early visual cortex.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Color Sensitivity of the Duration Aftereffect Depends on Sub- and Supra-second Durations.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Duration Selectivity in Right Parietal Cortex Reflects the Subjective Experience of Time.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2020Article
- Adaptation reveals multi-stage coding of visual duration.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Representations of time in human frontoparietal cortex.Communications biology · 2018Article
- Duration Aftereffect Depends on the Duration of Adaptation.Frontiers in psychology · 2017Article
- Object size determines the spatial spread of visual time.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2016Article
- Multiple channels of visual time perception.Current opinion in behavioral sciences · 2016Article
- Duration Adaptation Occurs Across the Sub- and Supra-Second Systems.Frontiers in psychology · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adaptation to relatively long or short sensory events leads to a negative aftereffect, such that the durations of the subsequent events within a certain range appear to be contracted or expanded. The distortion in perceived duration is presumed to arise from the adaptation of duration detectors. Here, we focus on the positional sensitivity of those visual duration detectors by exploring whether the duration aftereffect may be constrained by the visual location of stimuli. We adopted two different paradigms, one that tests for transfer across visual hemifields, and the other that tests for simultaneous selectivity between visual hemifields. By employing these experimental designs, we show that the duration aftereffect strongly transfers across visual hemifields and is not contingent on them. The lack of position specificity suggests that duration detectors in the visual system may operate at a relatively later stage of sensory processing.
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.