ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2021
Tactile temporal offset cues reduce visual representational momentum.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Invariant representations in abstract concept grounding - the physical world in grounded cognition.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Review
- Phasic alertness boosts representational momentum.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The perception of dynamic objects is sometimes biased. For example, localizing a moving object after it has disappeared results in a perceptual shift in the direction of motion, a bias known as representational momentum. We investigated whether the temporal characteristics of an irrelevant, spatially uninformative vibrotactile stimulus bias the perceived location of a visual target. In two visuotactile experiments, participants judged the final location of a dynamic, visual target. Simultaneously, a continuous (starting with the onset of the visual target, Experiments 1 and 2) or brief (33-ms stimulation, Experiment 2) vibrotactile stimulus (at the palm of participant's hands) was presented, and the offset disparity between the visual target and tactile stimulation was systematically varied. The results indicate a cross-modal influence of tactile stimulation on the perceived final location of the visual target. Closer inspection of the nature of this cross-modal influence, observed here for the first time, reveals that the vibrotactile stimulus was likely just taken as a temporal cue regarding the offset of the visual target, but no strong interaction and combined processing of the two stimuli occurred. The present results are related to similar cross-modal temporal illusions and current accounts of multisensory perception, integration, and cross-modal facilitation.
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.