ArticleClinical psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science2017
Larger Receptive Field Size as a Mechanism Underlying Atypical Motion Perception in Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Article in Clinical psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Directional Motion Sensitivity in Visual Snow Syndrome and Its Relation to Trailing-Type Palinopsia.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- The Role of Population Receptive Field Sizes in Higher-Order Visual Dysfunction.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2024Review
- Visual surround suppression at the neural and perceptual levels.Cognitive neurodynamics · 2024Review
- Gamma oscillations point to the role of primary visual cortex in atypical motion processing in autism.PloS one · 2023Article
- Atypical visual motion prediction abilities in autism spectrum disorder.Clinical psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2021Article
- Reduced surround suppression in monocular motion perception.Journal of vision · 2021Article
- Neural Mechanisms of Visual Motion Anomalies in Autism: A Two-Decade Update and Novel Aetiology.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Review
- Weaker neural suppression in autism.Nature communications · 2020Article
- Response Dissociation in Hierarchical Cortical Circuits: a Unique Feature of Autism Spectrum Disorder.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2020Article
- Spatial suppression promotes rapid figure-ground segmentation of moving objects.Nature communications · 2019Article
- PAC1R Genotype to Phenotype Correlations in Autism Spectrum Disorder.Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research · 2019Article
- Validation of motion perception of briefly displayed images using a tablet.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Sex Differences in Visual Motion Processing.Current biology : CB · 2018Article
- Visually Evoked Response Differences to Contrast and Motion in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder.Brain sciences · 2018Article
- Article
- Do different experimental tasks affect psychophysical measurements of motion perception in autism-spectrum disorder? An analysis.Clinical optometry · 2018Review
- High internal noise and poor external noise filtering characterize perception in autism spectrum disorder.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Sensory perception in autism.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2017Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Atypical visual motion perception has been widely observed in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The pattern of results, however, has been inconsistent. Emerging mechanistic hypotheses seek to explain these variable patterns of atypical motion sensitivity, each uniquely predicting specific patterns of performance across varying stimulus conditions. Here, we investigated the integrity of two such fundamental mechanisms-response gain control and receptive field size. Twenty children and adolescents with ASD and 20 typically developing (TD) age- and IQ-matched controls performed a motion discrimination task. To adequately model group differences in both mechanisms of interest, we tested a range of 23 stimulus conditions varying in size and contrast. Results revealed a motion perception impairment in ASD that was specific to the smallest sized stimuli (1°), irrespective of stimulus contrast. Model analyses provided evidence for larger receptive field size in ASD as the mechanism that explains this size-specific reduction of motion sensitivity.
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.