ArticleJournal of vision2022
Perceptual scale for transparency: Common fate overrides geometrical and color cues.
Article in Journal of vision, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Objects that pass light through are considered transparent, and we generally expect that the light coming out will match the color of the object. However, when the object is placed on a colored surface, the light coming back to our eyes becomes a composite of surface, illumination, and transparency properties. Despite that, we can often perceive separate overlaid and overlaying layers differing in colors. How neurons separate the information to extract the transparent layer remains unknown, but the physical characteristics of transparent filters generate geometrical and color features in retinal images, which could provide cues for separating layers. We estimated the relative importance of such cues in a perceptual scale for transparency, using stimuli in which X- or T-junctions, different relative motions, and consistent or inconsistent colors cooperated or competed in forced-preference psychophysics experiments. Maximum-likelihood Thurstone scaling revealed that motion increased transparency for X-junctions, but decreased transparency for T-junctions by creating the percept of an opaque patch. However, if the motion of a filter uncovered a dynamically changing but stationary pattern, sharing a common fate with the surround but forming T-junctions, the probability of seeing transparency was almost as high as for moving X-junctions, despite the stimulus being physically improbable. In addition, geometric cues overrode color inconsistency to a great degree. Finally, a linear model of transparency perception as a function of relative motions between filter, overlay, and surround layers, contour continuation, and color consistency, quantified a hierarchy of latent influences on when the filter is seen as a separate transparent layer.
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.