Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32529469›Full record

ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2020

Emotional judgments of scenes are influenced by unintentional averaging.

Yavin Alwis, Jason M Haberman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Your ears don't change what your eyes like: People can independently report the pleasure of music and images.Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. The pleasure of multiple images.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2021
    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.

Yavin AlwisThe Department of Psychology, Rhodes College, 2000 N Parkway, Memphis, TN, USA.
Jason M HabermanThe Department of Psychology, Rhodes College, 2000 N Parkway, Memphis, TN, USA. habermanj@rhodes.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-9578-0593

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe visual system uses ensemble perception to summarize visual input across a variety of domains. This heuristic operates at multiple levels of vision, compressing information as basic as oriented lines or as complex as emotional faces. Given its pervasiveness, the ensemble unsurprisingly can influence how an individual item is perceived, and vice versa.

methodsIn the current experiments, we tested whether the perceived emotional valence of a single scene could be influenced by surrounding, simultaneously presented scenes. Observers first rated the emotional valence of a series of individual scenes. They then saw ensembles of the original images, presented in sets of four, and were cued to rate, for a second time, one of four.

resultsResults confirmed that the perceived emotional valence of the cued image was pulled toward the mean emotion of the surrounding ensemble on the majority of trials, even though the ensemble was task-irrelevant. Control experiments and analyses confirmed that the pull was driven by high-level, ensemble information.

conclusionWe conclude that high-level ensemble information can influence how we perceive individual items in a crowd, even when working memory demands are low and the ensemble information is not directly task-relevant.

Indexed as

EmotionsSocial PerceptionAdolescentAdultCuesFacial RecognitionHumansPattern Recognition, VisualYoung AdultEnsemble perceptionScenesValence

Identifiers

PMID32529469
PMCPMC7290017

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.