Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37155632›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Blurring the boundary between models and reality: Visual perception of scale assessed by performance.

Tim S Meese, Daniel H Baker, Robert J Summers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

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.

Tim S MeeseCollege of Health and Life Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Daniel H BakerCollege of Health and Life Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0161-443X
Robert J SummersCollege of Health and Life Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4857-7354

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the primary jobs of visual perception is to build a three-dimensional representation of the world around us from our flat retinal images. These are a rich source of depth cues but no single one of them can tell us about scale (i.e., absolute depth and size). For example, the pictorial depth cues in a (perfect) scale model are identical to those in the real scene that is being modelled. Here we investigate image blur gradients, which derive naturally from the limited depth of field available for any optical device and can be used to help estimate visual scale. By manipulating image blur artificially to produce what is sometimes called fake tilt shift miniaturization, we provide the first performance-based evidence that human vision uses this cue when making forced-choice judgements about scale (identifying which of an image pair was a photograph of a full-scale railway scene, and which was a 1:76 scale model). The orientation of the blur gradient (relative to the ground plane) proves to be crucial, though its rate of change is less important for our task, suggesting a fairly coarse visual analysis of this image parameter.

Indexed as

Depth PerceptionVisual PerceptionCuesGravitationHumansJudgment

Identifiers

PMID37155632
PMCPMC10166532

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.