ArticleJournal of vision2020
Cueing the Necker cube: Pupil dilation reflects the viewing-from-above constraint in bistable perception.
Article in Journal of vision, 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.
- Spontaneous perceptual reversals are accompanied by systematic changes in pupil size but not respiration phase.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Spontaneous perceptual alternations and higher-order cognitive processes: an exploratory study.Cognitive processing · 2025Article
- Eye-movement patterns for perceiving bistable figures.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Temporal dynamics of auditory bistable perception correlated with fluctuation of baseline pupil size.Psychophysiology · 2022Article
- Backward and forward neck tilt affects perceptual bias when interpreting ambiguous figures.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We hypothesized that a perceptually ambiguous or bistable object (Necker cube) can be more effectively biased to assume a point of view-from-above (VFA) than from below the object by cueing attention. Participants viewed a Necker cube in which one surface was temporarily shaded so as to prime a specific perspective on the cube. Subsequently, the standard (wireframe) Necker cube was viewed for 3 seconds, and participants reported what perspective they had seen initially and whether their perception shifted to the alternative perspective during the brief viewing. Concomitantly, pupil size was monitored with an eye-tracker to obtain an index of cognitive effort. There were two conditions: passive viewing and forced attention to sustain the initially primed perspective. We confirmed the presence of a VFA bias with forced attention, which was accompanied by reduced attentional effort, as indexed by a reduced pupil diameter, compared with the view-from-below. Participants showed no bias during passive viewing. We suggest that the level of intensive attention, when retrieving and maintaining a specific view from memory, is mirrored in the size of the eye pupils and may reflect ecological constraints on visual perception.
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.