Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32832586›Full record

ArticleCurrent opinion in behavioral sciences2019

Individual differences and their implications for color perception.

Kara J Emery, Michael A Webster

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current opinion in behavioral sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Achromatic loci in normal and anomalous trichromats.Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Navigating color integrity in data visualization.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Color constancy for daylight illumination changes in anomalous trichromats and dichromats.Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision · 2023
    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.

Kara J EmeryGraduate Program in Integrative Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno.
Michael A WebsterGraduate Program in Integrative Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno.

Funding

SALIENCE, ADAPTATION, AND NATURAL IMAGE STATISTICSR01EY010834 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA RENO · PI WEBSTER, MICHAEL A · 2000 to 2023
$4.6M
COLOR CONTRAST ADAPTATIONR29EY010834 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA RENO · PI WEBSTER, MICHAEL A · 1995 to 1999
–
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY010834NEI NIH HHS R29 EY010834
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individual differences are a conspicuous feature of color vision and arise from many sources, in both the observer and the world. These differences have important practical implications for comparing and correcting perception and performance, and important theoretical implications for understanding the design principles underlying color coding. Color percepts within and between individuals often vary less than the variations in spectral sensitivity might predict. This stability is achieved by a variety of processes that compensate perception for the sensitivity limits of the eye and brain. Yet judgments of color between individuals can also vary widely, and in ways that are not readily explained by differences in sensitivity or the environment. These differences are uncorrelated across different color categories, and could reflect how these categories are learned or represented.

Identifiers

PMID32832586
PMCPMC7430749

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.