ArticlePeerJ2019
Perceptual load modulates contour integration in conscious and unconscious states.
Article in PeerJ, 2019. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Windows of Integration Hypothesis Revisited.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous research has documented that contour detection and integration may either be affected by local features such as the distances between elements or by high-level cognitive factors such as attention in our visual system. Less is known about how low and high level factors interact to influence contour integration. In this paper, we investigated how attention modulates contour integration through saliency (different element spacing) and topological propert ies (circle or S-shaped) when the state of conscious awareness is manipulated. A modified inattentional blindness (IB) combined with the Posner cuing paradigm was adopted in our three-phased experiment (unconscious-training-conscious). Attention was manipulated with high or low perceptual load for a foveal go/no-go task. Cuing effects were utilized to assess the covert processing of contours prior to a peripheral orientation discrimination task. We found that (1) salient circles and S-contours induced different cuing effects under low perceptual load but not with high load; (2) no consistent pattern of cuing effects was found for non-salient contours in all the conditions; (3) a positive cuing effect was observed for salient circles either consciously or unconsciously while a negative cuing effect occurred for salient S-contours only consciously. These results suggest that conscious awareness plays a pivotal role in coordinating a closure effect with the level of perceptual load. Only salient circles can be successfully integrated in an unconscious state under low perceptual load although both salient circles and S-contours can be done consciously. Our findings support a bi-directional mechanism that low-level sensory features interact with high-level cognitive factors in contour integration.
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.