ArticleJournal of vision2017
Early dynamics of stereoscopic surface slant perception.
Article in Journal of vision, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Orienting attention across binocular disparity.PNAS nexus · 2023Article
- The Expression Patterns of Cytochrome Oxidase and Immediate-Early Genes Show Absence of Ocular Dominance Columns in the Striate Cortex of Squirrel Monkeys Following Monocular Inactivation.Frontiers in neuroanatomy · 2021Article
- Textured surface stereoscopy.i-PerceptionArticle
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
Abstract
Surface orientation is an important visual primitive that can be estimated from monocular or binocular (stereoscopic) signals. Changes in motor planning occur within about 200 ms after either type of signal is perturbed, but the time it takes for apparent (perceived) slant to develop from stereoscopic cues is not known. Apparent slant sometimes develops very slowly (Gillam, Chambers, & Russo, 1988; van Ee & Erkelens, 1996). However, these long durations could reflect the time it takes for the visual system to resolve conflicts between slant cues that inevitably specify different slants in laboratory displays (Allison & Howard, 2000). We used a speed-accuracy tradeoff analysis to measure the time it takes to discriminate slant, allowing us to report psychometric functions as a function of response time. Observers reported which side of a slanted surface was farther, with a temporal deadline for responding that varied block-to-block. Stereoscopic slant discrimination rose above chance starting at 200 ms after stimulus onset. Unexpectedly, observers discriminated slant from binocular disparity faster than texture, and for stereoscopic whole-field stimuli faster than stereoscopic slant contrast stimuli. However, performance after the initial deviation from chance increased more rapidly for slant-contrast stimuli than whole-field stimuli. Discrimination latencies were similar for slants about the horizontal and vertical axes, but performance increased faster for slants about the vertical axis. Finally, slant from vertical disparity was somewhat slower than slant from horizontal disparity, which may reflect cue conflict. These results demonstrate, in contradiction with the previous literature, that the perception of slant from disparity happens very quickly-in fact, more quickly than the perception of slant from texture-and in comparable time to the simple perception of brightness from luminance.
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.