ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2023
Influence of colour vision on attention to, and impression of, complex aesthetic images.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2023. 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.
- A unifying principle of chromatic coding across biological and artificial systems.Science advances · 2026Article
- Revealing the Concealed in Monocular and Binocular Vision.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Perception and communication of relevant colours in paintings by observers with colour vision deficiencies.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Attentional responses to the color exposure sequence of landscape paintings: evidence from fNIRS and eye-tracking.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Temporal and spatial analysis of event-related potentials in response to color saliency differences among various color vision types.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
- Influence of colour vision on attention to, and impression of, complex aesthetic images.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humans exhibit colour vision variations due to genetic polymorphisms, with trichromacy being the most common, while some people are classified as dichromats. Whether genetic differences in colour vision affect the way of viewing complex images remains unknown. Here, we investigated how people with different colour vision focused their gaze on aesthetic paintings by eye-tracking while freely viewing digital rendering of paintings and assessed individual impressions through a decomposition analysis of adjective ratings for the images. Gaze-concentrated areas among trichromats were more highly correlated than those among dichromats. However, compared with the brief dichromatic experience with the simulated images, there was little effect of innate colour vision differences on impressions. These results indicate that chromatic information is instructive as a cue for guiding attention, whereas the impression of each person is generated according to their own sensory experience and normalized through one's own colour space.
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.