Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37099279›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2023

Visual perception of travel distance for self-motion through crowds.

Anna-Gesina Hülemeier, Markus Lappe

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 53% 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anna-Gesina HülemeierDepartment of Psychology, University of Münster, Münster, North-Rhine Westphalia, Germany.
Markus LappeDepartment of Psychology, University of Münster, Münster, North-Rhine Westphalia, Germany.
University of Münster · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humans can use visual motion to estimate the distance they have traveled. In static environments, optic flow generated by self-motion provides a pattern of expanding motion that is used for the estimation of travel distance. When the environment is populated by other people, their biological motion destroys the one-to-on correspondence between optic flow and travel distance. We investigated how observers estimate travel distance in a crowded environment. In three conditions, we simulated self-motion through a crowd of standing, approaching, or leading point-light walkers. For a standing crowd, optic flow is a veridical signal for distance perception. For an approaching crowd, the visual motion is the sum of the self-motion-induced optic flow and the optic flow produced by the approaching walkers. If only optic flow were to be used, travel distance estimates would be too high because of the approaching direction of the crowd toward the observer. If, on the other hand, cues from biological motion could be used to estimate the speed of the crowd, then the excessive optic from the approaching crowd flow might be compensated. In the leading crowd condition, in which walkers of the crowd keep their distance from the observer as they walk along with the observer, no optic flow is produced. In this condition, travel distance estimation would have to rely solely on biological motion information. We found that distance estimation was quite similar across these three conditions. This suggests that biological motion information can be used (a) to compensate for excessive optic flow in the approaching crowd condition and (b) to generate distance information in the leading crowd condition.

Indexed as

Motion PerceptionOptic FlowDistance PerceptionHumansVisual PerceptionWalking

Identifiers

PMID37099279
PMCPMC10148655
OpenAlexW4367048233

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.