ArticlePloS one2019
Fragmented ambiguous objects: Stimuli with stable low-level features for object recognition tasks.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Seeing things in psychosis: Reduced theta power in early neural responses to ambiguous visual stimuli predicts perceptual distortions.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025Article
- Impact of reduced-dimensionality independent components analysis on event-related potential measurements.Psychophysiology · 2023Article
- Neural Indicator of Altered Mismatch Detection Predicts Atypical Cognitive-Perceptual Experiences in Psychotic Psychopathology.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2022Article
- Aberrant Cortical Connectivity During Ambiguous Object Recognition Is Associated With Schizophrenia.Biological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging · 2021Article
- Perceptual Mechanisms of Visual Hallucinations and Illusions in Psychosis.Journal of psychiatry and brain science · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Visual object recognition is a complex skill that relies on the interaction of many spatially distinct and specialized visual areas in the human brain. One tool that can help us better understand these specializations and interactions is a set of visual stimuli that do not differ along low-level dimensions (e.g., orientation, contrast) but do differ along high-level dimensions, such as whether a real-world object can be detected. The present work creates a set of line segment-based images that are matched for luminance, contrast, and orientation distribution (both for single elements and for pair-wise combinations) but result in a range of object and non-object percepts. Image generation started with images of isolated objects taken from publicly available databases and then progressed through 3-stages: a computer algorithm generating 718 candidate images, expert observers selecting 217 for further consideration, and naïve observers performing final ratings. This process identified a set of 100 images that all have the same low-level properties but cover a range of recognizability (proportion of naïve observers (N = 120) who indicated that the stimulus "contained a known object") and semantic stability (consistency across the categories of living, non-living/manipulable, and non-living/non-manipulable when the same observers named "known" objects). Stimuli are available at https://github.com/caolman/FAOT.git.
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.