ArticleJournal of vision2023
Spatiotemporal jump detection during continuous film viewing.
Article in Journal of vision, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meaning maps predict reaction time in change detection.Visual cognition · 2025Article
- Spatiotemporal jump detection during continuous film viewing: Insights from a flicker paradigm.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prior research on film viewing has demonstrated that participants frequently fail to notice spatiotemporal disruptions, such as scene edits in the movies. Whether such insensitivity to spatiotemporal disruptions extends beyond scene edits in film viewing is not well understood. Across three experiments, we created spatiotemporal disruptions by presenting participants with minute long movie clips, and occasionally jumping the movie clips ahead or backward in time. Participants were instructed to press a button when they noticed any disruptions while watching the clips. The results from experiments 1 and 2 indicate that participants failed to notice the disruptions in continuity about 10% to 30% of the time depending on the magnitude of the jump. In addition, detection rates were lower by approximately 10% when the videos jumped ahead in time compared to the backward jumps across all jump magnitudes, suggesting a role of knowledge about the future affects jump detection. An additional analysis used optic flow similarity during these disruptions. Our findings suggest that insensitivity to spatiotemporal disruptions during film viewing is influenced by knowledge about future states.
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.