Trial reportProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2015
Persistent states in vision break universality and time invariance.
Trial report in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Serial dependence in visual perception: A meta-analysis and review.Journal of vision · 2023Pooled it
- The role of attention in perceptual biases in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder and healthy controls.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2026Article
- Sequential effects in facial attractiveness judgements: No evidence of stable individual differences.Perception · 2026Article
- Fixation versus periphery in visual awareness: Differential effects of recent perceptual experience.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Stability and robustness of idiosyncratic choice bias.Communications psychology · 2025Article
- Continuity fields enhance visual perception through positive serial dependence.Nature reviews. Psychology · 2024Article
- Sensory processing in humans and mice fluctuates between external and internal modes.PLoS biology · 2023Article
- Exploring the extent to which shared mechanisms contribute to motion-position illusions.Journal of vision · 2023Article
- Spatial variability in localization biases predicts crowding performance.Journal of vision · 2023Article
- Serial dependence in perception across naturalistic generative adversarial network-generated mammogram.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2023Article
- Serial Dependence in Dermatological Judgments.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Reconstructing a disambiguation sequence that forms perceptual memory of multistable displays via reverse correlation method: Bias onset perception but gently.Journal of vision · 2023Article
- Same stimulus, same temporal context, different percept? Individual differences in hysteresis and adaptation when perceiving multistable dot lattices.i-Perception · 2022Article
- The test-retest reliability and spatial tuning of serial dependence in orientation perception.Journal of vision · 2022Article
- When perception is stronger than physics: Perceptual similarities rather than laws of physics govern the perception of interacting objects.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2022Article
- Idiosyncratic biases in the perception of medical images.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Perception of the ambiguous motion quartet: A stimulus-observer interaction approach.Journal of vision · 2021Article
- Serial dependence in the perceptual judgments of radiologists.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2021Article
- Response Bias Reflects Individual Differences in Sensory Encoding.Psychological science · 2021Article
- Individual differences in the perception of visual illusions are stable across eyes, time, and measurement methods.Journal of vision · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studies of perception usually emphasize processes that are largely universal across observers and--except for short-term fluctuations--stationary over time. Here we test the universality and stationarity assumptions with two families of ambiguous visual stimuli. Each stimulus can be perceived in two different ways, parameterized by two opposite directions from a continuous circular variable. A large-sample study showed that almost all observers have preferred directions or biases, with directions lying within 90 degrees of the bias direction nearly always perceived and opposite directions almost never perceived. The biases differ dramatically from one observer to the next, and although nearly every bias direction occurs in the population, the population distributions of the biases are nonuniform, featuring asymmetric peaks in the cardinal directions. The biases for the two families of stimuli are independent and have distinct population distributions. Following external perturbations and spontaneous fluctuations, the biases decay over tens of seconds toward their initial values. Persistent changes in the biases are found on time scales of several minutes to 1 hour. On scales of days to months, the biases undergo a variety of dynamical processes such as drifts, jumps, and oscillations. The global statistics of a majority of these long-term time series are well modeled as random walk processes. The measurable fluctuations of these hitherto unknown degrees of freedom show that the assumptions of universality and stationarity in perception may be unwarranted and that models of perception must include both directly observable variables as well as covert, persistent states.
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.