ArticleBrain and cognition2022
Spatial frequency impacts perceptual and attentional ERP components across cultures.
Article in Brain and cognition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cultural differences in spatial frequency tunings to faces do not generalize to visual scenes and object stimuli.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Article
- Visual short-term memory, culture, and image structure.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- How Socially Avoidant Emerging Adults Process Social Feedback during Human-to-Human Interaction after Social Rejection: An Event-Related Potential Study.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Do subtle cultural differences sculpt face pareidolia?Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany) · 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
Culture impacts visual perception in several ways.To identify stages of perceptual processing that differ between cultures, we usedelectroencephalography measures of perceptual and attentional responses to simple visual stimuli.Gabor patches of higher or lower spatialfrequencywere presented at high contrast to 25 American and 31 East Asian participants while they were watching for the onset of aninfrequent, oddball stimulus. Region of interest and mass univariate analyses assessed how cultural background and stimuli spatial frequency affected the visual evoked response potentials. Across both groups, the Gabor of lower spatial frequency produced stronger evoked response potentials in the anterior N1 and P3 than did the higher frequency Gabor. The mass univariate analyses also revealed effects of spatial frequency, including a frontal negativity around 150 ms and a widespread posterior positivity around 300 ms. The effects of spatial frequency generally differed little across cultures; although there was some evidence for cultural differences in the P3 response to different frequencies at the Pz electrode, this effect did not emerge in the mass univariate analyses. We discuss these results in relation to those from previous studies, and explore the potential advantages of mass univariate analyses for cultural neuroscience.
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.