ArticleScientific reports2022
Aging and the visual perception of object size.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The visual perception of outdoor angular spatial relationships.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- The size-distance scaling of real objects and afterimages is equivalent in typical but not reduced visual environments.Experimental brain research · 2025Article
- Aging and visual pattern detection.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Age-related changes in the susceptibility to visual illusions of size.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The visual perception of long outdoor distances.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An experiment evaluated the ability of 30 younger and older adults to visually judge object size under three conditions: (1) full cue, (2) in the dark, with linear perspective, and (3) in complete darkness. Each observer made repeated judgments for the same square stimuli (the task was to adjust a separation until it matched the perceived size of the squares), enabling an evaluation of precision as well as accuracy. The judgments were just as accurate in the dark with linear perspective condition as in the full cue condition, indicating that linear perspective serves as an important source of optical information to support the perception of object size). In contrast, in complete darkness (where linear perspective information was unavailable), the accuracy of the observers' judgments was poor. Finally, there was no difference in either the accuracy or the precision of the observers' judgments between the two age groups, despite the fact that the older adults were more than 50 years older than the younger adults (mean age of the younger and older adults was 22.3 and 74.1 years, respectively). The ability to visually perceive object size is well maintained with increasing age, unlike a number of other important visual abilities.
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.