ArticleBehavior research methods2023
A standardised set of images for judgements of proportion.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Perceptual anchoring effects: Evidence of response bias and a change in estimates sensitivity.Brain and behavior · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the present work, we present normative data for a set of 39 original clipart-style images that can be used as material in studies involving judgements of proportion. The original images are drawings that depict different day-to-day scenarios (e.g., lighted windows in a building; books on a shelf) and each has seven variants of different proportions (from 20% to 80%) belonging to different categories (discrete vs continuous; social vs non-social; natural vs artificial; stimuli physical dimensions; number of referents). Normative data for these images are presented in an interactive database (available at https://judgment-images-and-norms.shinyapps.io/estimates_interactive/ ), corresponding to the means of proportion estimates (in percentage form), the perceived ease of making such estimates, the perceived level of familiarity and liking for each image, and the relationships between these variables. In the paper, we analyse the data at an individual level, addressing how the latter judgements are related to the proportion estimates, how those estimates are related to objective proportions, and how these relationships are moderated by image category. The analyses presented in this paper aim to aid readers in selecting images that enable them to better address specific influences on proportional estimates or to control for those influences in their studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36109487What 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.