ArticleRoyal Society open science2016
A tilt after-effect for images of buildings: evidence of selectivity for the orientation of everyday scenes.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Visual field asymmetries develop throughout adolescence.iScience · 2025Article
- Visual adaptation stronger at the horizontal than the vertical meridian: Linking performance with V1 cortical surface area.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- A perceptual bias for man-made objects in humans.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2019Article
- Adaptation in the visual cortex: a case for probing neuronal populations with natural stimuli.F1000Research · 2017Review
- Perception of Upright: Multisensory Convergence and the Role of Temporo-Parietal Cortex.Frontiers in neurology · 2017Review
- A tilt after-effect for images of buildings: evidence of selectivity for the orientation of everyday scenes.Royal Society open science · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The tilt after-effect (TAE) is thought to be a manifestation of gain control in mechanisms selective for spatial orientation in visual stimuli. It has been demonstrated with luminance-defined stripes, contrast-defined stripes, orientation-defined stripes and even with natural images. Of course, all images can be decomposed into a sum of stripes, so it should not be surprising to find a TAE when adapting and test images contain stripes that differ by 15° or so. We show this latter condition is not necessary for the TAE with natural images: adaptation to slightly tilted and vertically filtered houses produced a 'repulsive' bias in the perceived orientation of horizontally filtered houses. These results suggest gain control in mechanisms selective for spatial orientation in natural images.
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.