ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2023
Spontaneous Necker-cube reversals may not be that spontaneous.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantum-Tunnelling Oscillators for Cognitive Modelling and Neural Computation: Foundations, Machine-Vision Realisation and Applications.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Spontaneous perceptual reversals are accompanied by systematic changes in pupil size but not respiration phase.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Measuring restoration quality in urban forest greenways: insights for planning and management.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Visual imagination can influence visual perception - towards an experimental paradigm to measure imagination.Scientific reports · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: During observation of the ambiguous Necker cube, our perception suddenly reverses between two about equally possible 3D interpretations. During passive observation, perceptual reversals seem to be sudden and spontaneous. A number of theoretical approaches postulate destabilization of neural representations as a pre-condition for reversals of ambiguous figures. In the current study, we focused on possible Electroencephalogram (EEG) correlates of perceptual destabilization, that may allow prediction of an upcoming perceptual reversal. Methods: We presented ambiguous Necker cube stimuli in an onset-paradigm and investigated the neural processes underlying endogenous reversals as compared to perceptual stability across two consecutive stimulus presentations. In a separate experimental condition, disambiguated cube variants were alternated randomly, to exogenously induce perceptual reversals. We compared the EEG immediately before and during endogenous Necker cube reversals with corresponding time windows during exogenously induced perceptual reversals of disambiguated cube variants. Results: For the ambiguous Necker cube stimuli, we found the earliest differences in the EEG between reversal trials and stability trials already 1 s before a reversal occurred, at bilateral parietal electrodes. The traces remained similar until approximately 1100 ms before a perceived reversal, became maximally different at around 890 ms ( Discussion: The identified EEG effects may reflect destabilized states of neural representations, related to destabilized perceptual states preceding a perceptual reversal. They further indicate that spontaneous Necker cube reversals are most probably not as spontaneous as generally thought. Rather, the destabilization may occur over a longer time scale, at least 1 s before a reversal event, despite the reversal event as such being perceived as spontaneous by the viewer.
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.