ArticlePloS one2016
Motion-Dependent Filling-In of Spatiotemporal Information at the Blind Spot.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- An inhibitory brainstem pathway reduces visual detection during background motion.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Disentangling visually driven tactile predictions from multisensory integration in body ownership.Royal Society open science · 2026Article
- Article
- Flash grab effect within the regions of modal and amodal completions.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Fine-scale measurement of the blind spot borders.Vision research · 2023Article
- Article
- Stronger perceptual filling-in of spatiotemporal information in the blind spot compared with artificial gaps.Journal of vision · 2020Article
- Illusory occlusion affects stereoscopic depth perception.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- On the functional order of binocular rivalry and blind spot filling-in.Vision research · 2017Article
- Filling-in rivalry: Perceptual alternations in the absence of retinal image conflict.Journal of vision · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We usually do not notice the blind spot, a receptor-free region on the retina. Stimuli extending through the blind spot appear filled in. However, if an object does not reach through but ends in the blind spot, it is perceived as "cut off" at the boundary. Here we show that even when there is no corresponding stimulation at opposing edges of the blind spot, well known motion-induced position shifts also extend into the blind spot and elicit a dynamic filling-in process that allows spatial structure to be extrapolated into the blind spot. We presented observers with sinusoidal gratings that drifted into or out of the blind spot, or flickered in counterphase. Gratings moving into the blind spot were perceived to be longer than those moving out of the blind spot or flickering, revealing motion-dependent filling-in. Further, observers could perceive more of a grating's spatial structure inside the blind spot than would be predicted from simple filling-in of luminance information from the blind spot edge. This is evidence for a dynamic filling-in process that uses spatiotemporal information from the motion system to extrapolate visual percepts into the scotoma of the blind spot. Our findings also provide further support for the notion that an explicit spatial shift of topographic representations contributes to motion-induced position illusions.
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.