Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34753999›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

The role of contextual materials in object recognition.

Tim Lauer, Filipp Schmidt, Melissa L-H Võ

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Tim LauerScene Grammar Lab, Department of Psychology, Goethe University Frankfurt, Theodor-W.-Adorno-Platz 6, PEG 5.G144, 60323, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. tlauer@psych.uni-frankfurt.de.
Filipp SchmidtDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Justus Liebig University Giessen, 35394, Giessen, Germany.
Melissa L-H VõScene Grammar Lab, Department of Psychology, Goethe University Frankfurt, Theodor-W.-Adorno-Platz 6, PEG 5.G144, 60323, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) Project number 222641018 - SFB/TRR 135 TP C7 and C1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While scene context is known to facilitate object recognition, little is known about which contextual "ingredients" are at the heart of this phenomenon. Here, we address the question of whether the materials that frequently occur in scenes (e.g., tiles in a bathroom) associated with specific objects (e.g., a perfume) are relevant for the processing of that object. To this end, we presented photographs of consistent and inconsistent objects (e.g., perfume vs. pinecone) superimposed on scenes (e.g., a bathroom) and close-ups of materials (e.g., tiles). In Experiment 1, consistent objects on scenes were named more accurately than inconsistent ones, while there was only a marginal consistency effect for objects on materials. Also, we did not find any consistency effect for scrambled materials that served as color control condition. In Experiment 2, we recorded event-related potentials and found N300/N400 responses-markers of semantic violations-for objects on inconsistent relative to consistent scenes. Critically, objects on materials triggered N300/N400 responses of similar magnitudes. Our findings show that contextual materials indeed affect object processing-even in the absence of spatial scene structure and object content-suggesting that material is one of the contextual "ingredients" driving scene context effects.

Identifiers

PMID34753999
PMCPMC8578445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.