Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30673359›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2019

The material-weight illusion disappears or inverts in objects made of two materials.

Vivian C Paulun, Gavin Buckingham, Melvyn A Goodale, Roland W Fleming

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Vivian C PaulunDepartment of Psychology, University of Giessen , Giessen , Germany.
Gavin BuckinghamDepartment of Sport and Health Sciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter , Exeter , United Kingdom.
Melvyn A GoodaleBrain and Mind Institute, Western University , London, Ontario , Canada.
Roland W FlemingDepartment of Psychology, University of Giessen , Giessen , Germany.
Giessen School of Theology · DEUniversity of Exeter · GBUniversity of Giessen · DEWestern University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The material-weight illusion (MWI) occurs when an object that looks heavy (e.g., stone) and one that looks light (e.g., Styrofoam) have the same mass. When such stimuli are lifted, the heavier-looking object feels lighter than the lighter-looking object, presumably because well-learned priors about the density of different materials are violated. We examined whether a similar illusion occurs when a certain weight distribution is expected (such as the metal end of a hammer being heavier), but weight is uniformly distributed. In experiment 1, participants lifted bipartite objects that appeared to be made of two materials (combinations of stone, Styrofoam, and wood) but were manipulated to have a uniform weight distribution. Most participants experienced an inverted MWI (i.e., the heavier-looking side felt heavier), suggesting an integration of incoming sensory information with density priors. However, a replication of the classic MWI was found when the objects appeared to be uniformly made of just one of the materials ( experiment 2). Both illusions seemed to be independent of the forces used when the objects were lifted. When lifting bipartite objects but asked to judge the weight of the whole object, participants experienced no illusion ( experiment 3). In experiment 4, we investigated weight perception in objects with a nonuniform weight distribution and again found evidence for an integration of prior and sensory information. Taken together, our seemingly contradictory results challenge most theories about the MWI. However, Bayesian integration of competing density priors with the likelihood of incoming sensory information may explain the opposing illusions. NEW & NOTEWORTHY We report a novel weight illusion that contradicts all current explanations of the material-weight illusion: When lifting an object composed of two materials, the heavier-looking side feels heavier, even when the true weight distribution is uniform. The opposite (classic) illusion is found when the same materials are lifted in two separate objects. Identifying the common mechanism underlying both illusions will have implications for perception more generally. A potential candidate is Bayesian inference with competing priors.

Indexed as

IllusionsFemaleHumansMaleWeight PerceptionYoung AdultBayesian integrationgraspinggrip forceload forceweight perception

Identifiers

PMID30673359
PMCPMC6520622
OpenAlexW2914315015

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.