ArticlePloS one2018
Extrinsic grouping factors in motion-induced blindness.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Grouping strategies in numerosity perception between intrinsic and extrinsic grouping cues.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated how various grouping factors altered subjective disappearances of the individual targets in the motion-induced blindness display. The latter relies on a moving mask to render highly salient static targets temporarily subjectively invisible. Specifically, we employed two extrinsic grouping factors, the connectedness and the common region, and examined whether their presence would make targets more resilient against the suppression. In addition, we investigated whether the presence of an illusory Kanizsa triangle would affect the suppression of the inducing Pac-Man elements. We quantified the perceptual dynamics using the proportion of the disappearance time (this indicates whether targets became more resilient against the suppression), and the proportion of simultaneous disappearance and reappearance events (characterizes the tendency for the targets to disappear or reappear as a group). We report that a single mask that encompassed all targets (a common region grouping) significantly increased the proportion of simultaneous disappearance and reappearance events, but had no effect on the proportion of the disappearance time. In contrast, a line that connected two targets significantly decreased the total invisibility time, but had no impact on the simultaneity of the disappearance and reappearance events. We found no statistically significant effect of the presence of the illusory Kanizsa triangle on either measure. Finally, we found no interaction either between the common region and the connectedness or between the common region and the presence of the illusory Kanizsa triangle. Our results indicate that extrinsic grouping factors might influence the perception differently than the intrinsic ones and highlight the importance of using several measures to characterize the perceptual dynamics, as various grouping factors might affect it differentially.
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.