ArticleJournal of vision2022
Estimating the perceived dimension of psychophysical stimuli using triplet accuracy and hypothesis testing.
Article in Journal of vision, 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.
- Material fictions: Comparing physically based renderings and generative AI images through material perception.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- Exploring the role of micro-valence in the phenomenal space: insights from similarity judgments and deep learning models.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2026Article
- Synthesis and perceptual scaling of high-resolution naturalistic images using Stable Diffusion.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Perceptual dimensions of wood materials.Journal of vision · 2024Article
- An objective measurement approach to quantify the perceived distortions of spectacle lenses.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Mapping the dynamics of visual feature coding: Insights into perception and integration.PLoS computational biology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vision researchers are interested in mapping complex physical stimuli to perceptual dimensions. Such a mapping can be constructed using multidimensional psychophysical scaling or ordinal embedding methods. Both methods infer coordinates that agree as much as possible with the observer's judgments so that perceived similarity corresponds with distance in the inferred space. However, a fundamental problem of all methods that construct scalings in multiple dimensions is that the inferred representation can only reflect perception if the scale has the correct dimension. Here we propose a statistical procedure to overcome this limitation. The critical elements of our procedure are i) measuring the scale's quality by the number of correctly predicted triplets and ii) performing a statistical test to assess if adding another dimension to the scale improves triplet accuracy significantly. We validate our procedure through extensive simulations. In addition, we study the properties and limitations of our procedure using "real" data from various behavioral datasets from psychophysical experiments. We conclude that our procedure can reliably identify (a lower bound on) the number of perceptual dimensions for a given dataset.
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.