ArticleExperimental brain research2020
The contribution of stereopsis in Emmert's law.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2020. 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.
- Monocular size and distance scaling is modulated by the presence of a fixation point.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- The size-distance scaling of real objects and afterimages is equivalent in typical but not reduced visual environments.Experimental brain research · 2025Article
- Linear perspective cues have a greater effect on the perceptual rescaling of distant stimuli than textures in the virtual environment.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024Article
- Developmental Trajectories of Size Constancy as Implicitly Examined by Simple Reaction Times.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Does Vergence Affect Perceived Size?Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Size constancy is the ability to perceive objects as remaining constant in size regardless of their distance from the observer. Emmert's law demonstrates that viewing distance determines the perceived size of afterimages according to the amount of depth cues that are available. Using an afterimage paradigm, we examined to what extent removing stereopsis and other depth cues affects size-distance scaling. Thirty participants 'projected' afterimages onto a surface presented at different distances under binocular, monocular, and eyes-closed conditions. The perceived size of the afterimages closely followed the size-distance scaling predictions made by Emmert's law under binocular testing conditions, when all depth cues were available. In contrast, monocular testing decreased adherence to Emmert's law, while the eyes-closed condition resulted in a greater breakdown of size-distance scaling. Because we used an afterimage paradigm, this study provides the first demonstration of how perceived size is modulated by the availability of depth cues under conditions with a constant retinal image stimulus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32215670What 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.