Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32433696›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Evaluating spatiotemporal integration of shape cues.

Taylor Burchfield, Ernest Greene

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Taylor BurchfieldLaboratory for Neurometric Research, Department of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, United States of America.
Ernest GreeneLaboratory for Neurometric Research, Department of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-4458-4760

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prior work has shown that humans can successfully identify letters that are constructed with a sparse array of dots, wherein the dot pattern reflects the strokes that would normally be used to fashion a given letter. In the present work the dots were briefly displayed, one at a time in sequence, varying the spatial order in which they were shown. A forward sequence was spatially ordered as though one were passing a stroke across the dots to connect them. Experiments compared this baseline condition to the following three conditions: a) the dot sequence was spatially ordered, but in the reverse direction from how letter strokes might normally be written; b) the dots in each stroke of the letter were displayed in a random order; c) the sequence of displayed dots were chosen for display from any location in the letter. Significant differences were found between the baseline condition and all three of the comparison conditions, with letter recognition being far worse for the random conditions than for conditions that provided consistent spatial ordering of dot sequences. These findings show that spatial order is critical for integration of shape cues that have been sequentially displayed.

Indexed as

Form PerceptionPattern Recognition, VisualRecognition, PsychologyCuesHumansPhotic Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID32433696
PMCPMC7239445

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.