Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27803794›Full record

Articlei-Perception

The Time-Course of Ultrarapid Categorization: The Influence of Scene Congruency and Top-Down Processing.

Steven Vanmarcke, Filip Calders, Johan Wagemans

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in i-Perception. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Scene inversion impairs activation of scene-object semantic bias.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Steven VanmarckeBrain and Cognition, University of Leuven, Belgium.
Filip CaldersBrain and Cognition, University of Leuven, Belgium.
Johan WagemansBrain and Cognition, University of Leuven, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although categorization can take place at different levels of abstraction, classic studies on semantic labeling identified the basic level, for example, dog, as entry point for categorization. Ultrarapid categorization tasks have contradicted these findings, indicating that participants are faster at detecting superordinate-level information, for example, animal, in a complex visual image. We argue that both seemingly contradictive findings can be reconciled within the framework of parallel distributed processing and its successor Leabra (Local, Error-driven and Associative, Biologically Realistic Algorithm). The current study aimed at verifying this prediction in an ultrarapid categorization task with a dynamically changing presentation time (PT) for each briefly presented object, followed by a perceptual mask. Furthermore, we manipulated two defining task variables: level of categorization (basic vs. superordinate categorization) and object presentation mode (object-in-isolation vs. object-in-context). In contradiction with previous ultrarapid categorization research, focusing on reaction time, we used accuracy as our main dependent variable. Results indicated a consistent superordinate processing advantage, coinciding with an overall improvement in performance with longer PT and a significantly more accurate detection of objects in isolation, compared with objects in context, at lower stimulus PT. This contextual disadvantage disappeared when PT increased, indicating that figure-ground separation with recurrent processing is vital for meaningful contextual processing to occur.

Indexed as

individual differencesobject perceptionpsychophysical researchrapid gist perceptionrecurrent processingscene congruencyultrarapid categorization

Identifiers

PMID27803794
PMCPMC5076752

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.