ReviewVision research2022
Calibrating Vision: Concepts and Questions.
Review in Vision research, 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.
- Time, space and feature similarity determine attractive and repulsive serial biases in trustworthiness impressions.BMC biology · 2026Article
- The dual role of endoplasmic reticulum stress in cerebral ischemia: from adaptive protection to apoptotic induction.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2026Review
- Color contrast adaptation and compensation in color deficiencies.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Effects of visual diet on colour discrimination and preference.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Designing for sensory adaptation: what you see depends on what you've been looking at - Recommendations, guidelines and standards should reflect this.Policy insights from the behavioral and brain sciences · 2024Article
- Chromatic and spatial image statistics predict infants' visual preferences and adults' aesthetic preferences for art.Journal of vision · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The idea that visual coding and perception are shaped by experience and adjust to changes in the environment or the observer is universally recognized as a cornerstone of visual processing, yet the functions and processes mediating these calibrations remain in many ways poorly understood. In this article we review a number of facets and issues surrounding the general notion of calibration, with a focus on plasticity within the encoding and representational stages of visual processing. These include how many types of calibrations there are - and how we decide; how plasticity for encoding is intertwined with other principles of sensory coding; how it is instantiated at the level of the dynamic networks mediating vision; how it varies with development or between individuals; and the factors that may limit the form or degree of the adjustments. Our goal is to give a small glimpse of an enormous and fundamental dimension of vision, and to point to some of the unresolved questions in our understanding of how and why ongoing calibrations are a pervasive and essential element of vision.
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.