ArticleJournal of vision2021
Flexible viewing time when estimating time-to-contact in 3D parabolic trajectories.
Article in Journal of vision, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Visual factors that determine sensory uncertainty in rapid interceptive hand movements.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- The predictive outfielder: a critical test across gravities.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Prediction of time to contact under perceptual and contextual uncertainties.Journal of vision · 2024Article
- Virtual reality modulates the control of upper limb motion in one-handed ball catching.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2022Article
- Motion-in-depth effects on interceptive timing errors in an immersive environment.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Gravity and Known Size Calibrate Visual Information to Time Parabolic Trajectories.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Obtaining reliable estimates of the time-to-contact (TTC) in a three-dimensional (3D) parabolic trajectory is still an open issue. A direct analysis of the optic flow cannot make accurate predictions for gravitationally accelerated objects. Alternatively, resorting to prior knowledge of gravity and size can provide accurate estimates of TTC in parabolic head-on trajectories, but its generalization depends on the specific geometry of the trajectory and particular moments. The aim of this work is to explore the preferred viewing windows to estimate TTC and how the available visual information affects these estimations. We designed a task in which participants, wearing an head-mounted display (HMD), had to time the moment a ball in a parabolic path returned at eye level. We used five trajectories for which accurate temporal predictions were available at different points of flight time. Our results show that our observers can predict both the trajectory of the ball and TTC based on the available visual information and previous experience with the task. However, the times at which our observers chose to gather the visual evidence did not match those in which visual information provided accurate TTC. Instead, they looked at the ball at relatively fixed temporal windows depending on the trajectory but not of TTC.
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.