ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2021
Quantitative examination of an unconventional form of the filled-space illusion.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The spatial interval containing some visual elements (fillers) seems to be longer than an empty interval of the same length, and the effect persists for most observers. This illusion of interrupted spatial extent (or the filled-space illusion) can be observed even in extremely simplified line drawings, but its origin is still not completely understood. Recently, we proposed a quantitative explanation for the results of experiments with stimuli containing either continuous or discrete filling: the illusion may be associated with the integration of distractor-induced effects near the endpoints (terminators) of the stimulus intervals. Subsequent analysis of the principles underlying the explanation allowed us to hypothesize the appearance of illusory effects caused by previously unknown stimulus modifications. To test the suggestions, in the present study we performed experiments with three-dot stimuli that contain a distracting circle (either outline or uniformly filled) surrounding one of the lateral terminators. It has been demonstrated that the illusion magnitude varies predictably with the size of the circle, and there is no significant difference between the data obtained for stimuli with the outline and filled distractors. To more thoroughly examine the illusion, the central angle of circular distracting arcs (real or imaginary) was used as an independent variable in supplementary experiments. A rather successful theoretical interpretation of the experimental results supports the suggestion that perceptual positional biases induced by additional context-evoked neural excitation can be considered as one of the main causes of the filled-space illusion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33791943What 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.