Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29229707›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2018

The Primary Role of Flow Processing in the Identification of Scene-Relative Object Movement.

Simon K Rushton, Diederick C Niehorster, Paul A Warren, Li Li

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Walking humans and running mice: perception and neural encoding of optic flow during self-motion.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Optic Flow: A History.i-Perception · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Flow parsing and biological motion.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Simon K RushtonSchool of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff CF10 3AT, United Kingdom, rushtonsk@cardiff.ac.uk ll114@nyu.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-8161-4095
Diederick C NiehorsterDepartment of Psychology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0002-4672-8756
Paul A WarrenDivision of Neuroscience and Experimental Psychology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, United Kingdom, and.ORCID 0000-0002-4071-7650
Li LiNeural Science Program, NYU-ECNU Institute of Brain and Cognitive Science, New York University Shanghai, Shanghai, People's Republic of China rushtonsk@cardiff.ac.uk ll114@nyu.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-8579-4975
Cardiff University · GBNew York University Shanghai · CNUniversity of Hong Kong · HKUniversity of Manchester · GB

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust WT089934
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Retinal image motion could be due to the movement of the observer through space or an object relative to the scene. Optic flow, form, and change of position cues all provide information that could be used to separate out retinal motion due to object movement from retinal motion due to observer movement. In Experiment 1, we used a minimal display to examine the contribution of optic flow and form cues. Human participants indicated the direction of movement of a probe object presented against a background of radially moving pairs of dots. By independently controlling the orientation of each dot pair, we were able to put flow cues to self-movement direction (the point from which all the motion radiated) and form cues to self-movement direction (the point toward which all the dot pairs were oriented) in conflict. We found that only flow cues influenced perceived probe movement. In Experiment 2, we switched to a rich stereo display composed of 3D objects to examine the contribution of flow and position cues. We moved the scene objects to simulate a lateral translation and counter-rotation of gaze. By changing the polarity of the scene objects (from light to dark and vice versa) between frames, we placed flow cues to self-movement direction in opposition to change of position cues. We found that again flow cues dominated the perceived probe movement relative to the scene. Together, these experiments indicate the neural network that processes optic flow has a primary role in the identification of scene-relative object movement.

Indexed as

AdultCuesFemaleHumansJudgmentMaleMotion PerceptionNerve NetOptic FlowPhotic StimulationRetinaVisual PerceptionYoung Adultflow parsingmotion processingobject movementoptic flowself-movement

Identifiers

PMID29229707
PMCPMC5815455
OpenAlexW2755021660

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.