ArticlePsychological research2021
Probing the effect of the expected-speed violation illusion.
Article in Psychological research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Motion perception is complex for the brain to process, involving interacting computations of distance, time, and speed. These computations can be biased by the context and the features of the perceived moving object, giving rise to several types of motion illusions. Recent research has shown that, in addition to object features and context, lifelong priors can bias attributes of perception. In the present work, we investigated if such long acquired expectations can bias speed perception. Using a two-interval forced-choice (2-IFC) task, we asked 160 participants in different experiments to judge which of two vehicles, one archetypically fast (e.g. a motorbike), and one comparatively slower (e.g. a bike), was faster. By varying the objective speeds of the two-vehicle types, and measuring the participants' point of subjective equality, we observed a consistent bias in participants' speed perception. Counterintuitively, in the first three experiments the speed of an archetypically slow vehicle had to be decreased relative to that of an archetypically fast vehicle, for the two to be judged as the same. Similarly, in the next three experiments, an archetypically fast vehicle's speed had to be increased relative to an archetypically slow vehicle's speed, for the two to be perceived as equal. Four additional control experiments replicated our results. We define this newly found bias as the expected-speed violation illusion (ESVI). We believe the ESVI as conceptually very similar to the size-weight illusion, and discuss it within the Bayesian framework of human perception.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33025210What 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.