Trial reportScientific reports2021
Gravitational effects of scene information in object localization.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 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.
- The Oddity Detection in Diverse Scenes (ODDS) database: Validated real-world scenes for studying anomaly detection.Behavior research methods · 2023Article
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
We effortlessly interact with objects in our environment, but how do we know where something is? An object's apparent position does not simply correspond to its retinotopic location but is influenced by its surrounding context. In the natural environment, this context is highly complex, and little is known about how visual information in a scene influences the apparent location of the objects within it. We measured the influence of local image statistics (luminance, edges, object boundaries, and saliency) on the reported location of a brief target superimposed on images of natural scenes. For each image statistic, we calculated the difference between the image value at the physical center of the target and the value at its reported center, using observers' cursor responses, and averaged the resulting values across all trials. To isolate image-specific effects, difference scores were compared to a randomly-permuted null distribution that accounted for any response biases. The observed difference scores indicated that responses were significantly biased toward darker regions, luminance edges, object boundaries, and areas of high saliency, with relatively low shared variance among these measures. In addition, we show that the same image statistics were associated with observers' saccade errors, despite large differences in response time, and that some effects persisted when high-level scene processing was disrupted by 180° rotations and color negatives of the originals. Together, these results provide evidence for landmark effects within natural images, in which feature location reports are pulled toward low- and high-level informative content in the scene.
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.