ArticleFrontiers in integrative neuroscience2018
Speed Biases With Real-Life Video Clips.
Article in Frontiers in integrative neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Playback Speed on Eye Movement Behavior During News Viewing: An Eye-Tracking Study.Journal of eye movement research · 2026Article
- Time and video speed perception: a comprehensive investigation of the relation between estimated video speed, clip duration and original duration.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2025Article
- Slow motion bias: Exploring the relation between time overestimation and increased perceived intentionality.Perception · 2023Article
- Basketball videos presented on a computer screen appear slower than in virtual reality.Cognitive processing · 2022Article
- If You Are Old, Videos Look Slow. The Paradoxical Effect of Age-Related Motor Decline on the Kinematic Interpretation of Visual Scenes.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
- Cortical Resonance to Visible and Invisible Visual Rhythms.Brain sciences · 2020Article
- Accuracy of Intercepting Moving Tactile Targets.Perception · 2019Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We live almost literally immersed in an artificial visual world, especially motion pictures. In this exploratory study, we asked whether the best speed for reproducing a video is its original, shooting speed. By using adjustment and double staircase methods, we examined speed biases in viewing real-life video clips in three experiments, and assessed their robustness by manipulating visual and auditory factors. With the tested stimuli (short clips of human motion, mixed human-physical motion, physical motion and ego-motion), speed underestimation was the rule rather than the exception, although it depended largely on clip content, ranging on average from 2% (ego-motion) to 32% (physical motion). Manipulating display size or adding arbitrary soundtracks did not modify these speed biases. Estimated speed was not correlated with estimated duration of these same video clips. These results indicate that the sense of speed for real-life video clips can be systematically biased, independently of the impression of elapsed time. Measuring subjective visual
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.