Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35199324›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2022

Modeling mean estimation tasks in within-trial and across-trial contexts.

Ke Tong, Chad Dubé

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Ke TongNanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore. ke.tong@ntu.edu.sg.
Chad DubéUniversity of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The mean estimation task, which explicitly asks observers to estimate the mean feature value of multiple stimuli, is a fundamental paradigm in research areas such as ensemble coding and cue integration. The current study uses computational models to formalize how observers summarize information in mean estimation tasks. We compare model predictions from our Fidelity-based Integration Model (FIM) and other models on their ability to simulate observed patterns in within-trial weight distribution, across-trial information integration, and set-size effects on mean estimation accuracy. Experiments show non-equal weighting within trials in both sequential and simultaneous mean estimation tasks. Observers implicitly overestimated trial means below the global mean and underestimated trial means above the global mean. Mean estimation performance declined and stabilized with increasing set sizes. FIM successfully simulated all observed patterns, while other models failed. FIM's information sampling structure provides a new way to interpret the capacity limit in visual working memory and sub-sampling strategies. As a model framework, FIM offers task-dependent modeling for various ensemble coding paradigms, facilitating research synthesis across different studies in the literature.

Indexed as

Memory, Short-TermVisual PerceptionHumansImplicit/explicit memoryMemory: Visual working and short-term memoryVisual perception

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.