ReviewVision (Basel, Switzerland)2022
The Irreducibility of Vision: Gestalt, Crowding and the Fundamentals of Vision.
Review in Vision (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. 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.
- Updated Expectations are Needed for Masked Priming Experiments: Commentary on Tsikandilakis et al. (2025).Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2026Article
- Dynamics of vision: Grouping takes longer than crowding.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Oculomotor Contributions to Foveal Crowding.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
What is fundamental in vision has been discussed for millennia. For philosophical realists and the physiological approach to vision, the objects of the outer world are truly given, and failures to perceive objects properly, such as in illusions, are just sporadic misperceptions. The goal is to replace the subjectivity of the mind by careful physiological analyses. Continental philosophy and the Gestaltists are rather skeptical or ignorant about external objects. The percepts themselves are their starting point, because it is hard to deny the truth of one own's percepts. I will show that, whereas both approaches can well explain many visual phenomena with classic visual stimuli, they both have trouble when stimuli become slightly more complex. I suggest that these failures have a deeper conceptual reason, namely that their foundations (objects, percepts) do not hold true. I propose that only physical states exist in a mind independent manner and that everyday objects, such as bottles and trees, are perceived in a mind-dependent way. The fundamental processing units to process objects are extended windows of unconscious processing, followed by short, discrete conscious percepts.
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.