ArticleJournal of cognitive neuroscience2021
Perspective Cues Make Eye-specific Contributions to 3-D Motion Perception.
Article in Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Richness of Vision in the Mammalian Brain: Neural Codes for Visual Perception and Behavior in Three Dimensions.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Review
- Single-Trial fMRI Decoding of 3D Motion with Stereoscopic and Perspective Cues.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Hierarchical computation of 3D motion across macaque areas MT and FST.Cell reports · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Robust 3-D visual perception is achieved by integrating stereoscopic and perspective cues. The canonical model describing the integration of these cues assumes that perspective signals sensed by the left and right eyes are indiscriminately pooled into a single representation that contributes to perception. Here, we show that this model fails to account for 3-D motion perception. We measured the sensitivity of male macaque monkeys to 3-D motion signaled by left-eye perspective cues, right-eye perspective cues, stereoscopic cues, and all three cues combined. The monkeys exhibited idiosyncratic differences in their biases and sensitivities for each cue, including left- and right-eye perspective cues, suggesting that the signals undergo at least partially separate neural processing. Importantly, sensitivity to combined cue stimuli was greater than predicted by the canonical model, which previous studies found to account for the perception of 3-D orientation in both humans and monkeys. Instead, 3-D motion sensitivity was best explained by a model in which stereoscopic cues were integrated with left- and right-eye perspective cues whose representations were at least partially independent. These results indicate that the integration of perspective and stereoscopic cues is a shared computational strategy across 3-D processing domains. However, they also reveal a fundamental difference in how left- and right-eye perspective signals are represented for 3-D orientation versus motion perception. This difference results in more effective use of available sensory information in the processing of 3-D motion than orientation and may reflect the temporal urgency of avoiding and intercepting moving objects.
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.