ArticleJournal of vision2020
How the forest interacts with the trees: Multiscale shape integration explains global and local processing.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Visual homogeneity computations in the brain enable solving property-based visual tasks.eLife · 2025Article
- The time course of categorical and perceptual similarity effects in visual search.Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance · 2022Article
- Using compositionality to understand parts in whole objects.The European journal of neuroscience · 2022Review
- Qualitative similarities and differences in visual object representations between brains and deep networks.Nature communications · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Hierarchical stimuli have been widely used to study global and local processing. Two classic phenomena have been observed using these stimuli: the global advantage effect (we identify the global shape faster) and an interference effect (we identify shape slower when the global and local shapes are different). Because these phenomena have been observed during shape categorization tasks, it is unclear whether they reflect the categorical judgment or the underlying shape representation. Understanding the underlying shape representation is also critical because both global and local processing are modulated by stimulus properties. We performed two experiments to investigate these issues. In Experiment 1, we show that these phenomena can be observed in a same-different task, and that participants show systematic variation in response times across image pairs. We show that the response times to any pair of images can be accurately predicted using two factors: their dissimilarity and their distinctiveness relative to other images. In Experiment 2, we show that these phenomena can also be observed in a visual search task where participant did not have to make any categorical shape judgments. Here too, participants showed highly systematic variations in response time that could be explained as a linear sum of shape comparisons across global and local scales. Finally, the dissimilarity and distinctiveness factors estimated from the same-different task were systematically related to the search dissimilarities observed during visual search. In sum, our results show that global and local processing phenomena are properties of a systematic shape representation governed by simple rules.
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.