Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36786748›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2023

Temporal stability of human heading perception.

Mufaddal Ali, Eli Decker, Oliver W Layton

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 56% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mufaddal AliDepartment of Computer Science, Colby College, Waterville, ME, USA.
Eli DeckerDepartment of Computer Science, Colby College, Waterville, ME, USA.
Oliver W LaytonDepartment of Computer Science, Colby College, Waterville, ME, USA.
Colby College · USGoogle (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humans are capable of accurately judging their heading from optic flow during straight forward self-motion. Despite the global coherence in the optic flow field, however, visual clutter and other naturalistic conditions create constant flux on the eye. This presents a problem that must be overcome to accurately perceive heading from optic flow-the visual system must maintain sensitivity to optic flow variations that correspond with actual changes in self-motion and disregard those that do not. One solution could involve integrating optic flow over time to stabilize heading signals while suppressing transient fluctuations. Stability, however, may come at the cost of sluggishness. Here, we investigate the stability of human heading perception when subjects judge their heading after the simulated direction of self-motion changes. We found that the initial heading exerted an attractive influence on judgments of the final heading. Consistent with an evolving heading representation, bias toward the initial heading increased with the size of the heading change and as the viewing duration of the optic flow consistent with the final heading decreased. Introducing periods of sensory dropout (blackouts) later in the trial increased bias whereas an earlier one did not. Simulations of a neural model, the Competitive Dynamics Model, demonstrates that a mechanism that produces an evolving heading signal through recurrent competitive interactions largely captures the human data. Our findings characterize how the visual system balances stability in heading perception with sensitivity to change and support the hypothesis that heading perception evolves over time.

Indexed as

Motion PerceptionOptic FlowBiasHumansMotionPhotic Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID36786748
PMCPMC9932552
OpenAlexW4320710140

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.