ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
Visual and haptic cues in processing occlusion.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Although shape is effective in processing occlusion, ambiguities in segmentation can also be addressed using depth discontinuity given visually and haptically. This study elucidates the contribution of visual and haptic cues to depth discontinuity in processing occlusion. Methods: A virtual reality experiment was conducted with 15 students as participants. Word stimuli were presented on a head-mounted display for recognition. The central part of the words was masked with a virtual ribbon placed at different depths so that the ribbon appeared as an occlusion. The visual depth cue was either present with binocular stereopsis or absent with monocular presentation. The haptic cue was either missing, provided consecutively, or concurrently, by actively tracing a real off-screen bar edge that was positionally aligned with the ribbon in the virtual space. Recognition performance was compared between depth cue conditions. Results: We found that word recognition was better with the stereoscopic cue but not with the haptic cue, although both cues contributed to greater confidence in depth estimation. The performance was better when the ribbon was at the farther depth plane to appear as a hollow, rather than when it was at the nearer depth plane to cover the word. Discussion: The results indicate that occlusion is processed in the human brain by visual input only despite the apparent effectiveness of haptic space perception, reflecting a complex set of natural constraints.
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.