ArticleJournal of vision2023
Effects of interocular grouping demands on binocular rivalry.
Article in Journal of vision, 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.
- Neural Markers of Interocular Grouping During Binocular Rivalry With MEG.Human brain mapping · 2026Article
- Neither the number of feature dimensions nor their task relevance necessarily affect interocular grouping in binocular rivalry.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- A novel image-based neuronal network model framework for understanding visual multistability and neurological disorders.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2026Article
- Alpha oscillations mediate inhibitory control and perceptual transitions during binocular rivalry.iScience · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Binocular rivalry (BR) is a visual phenomenon in which perception alternates between two non-fusible images presented to each eye. Transition periods between dominant and suppressed images are marked by mixed percepts, where participants report fragments of each image being dynamically perceived. Interestingly, BR remains robust even when typical images are subdivided and presented in complementary patches to each eye, a phenomenon termed interocular grouping (IOG). The objective of the present study was to determine if increasing grouping demand in the context of BR changes the perceptual experience of rivalry. In 48 subjects with normal vision, mean dominant and mixed percept durations were recorded for classic BR and IOG conditions with increasing grouping demands from two, four, and six patches. We found that, as grouping demands increased, the duration of mixed periods increased. Indeed, durations of dominant and mixed percepts, as well as percentage of time spent in dominant or mixed state, differed significantly across conditions. However, durations of global dominant percepts remained relatively stable and saturated at about 1.5 seconds, despite the exponential increase in possible mixed combinations. Evidence shows that this saturation followed a nonlinear trend. The data also indicate that grouping across the vertical meridian is slightly more stable than for the horizontal meridian. Finally, individual differences in speed of alternation identified during BR were maintained in all interocular grouping conditions. These results provide new information about binocular visual spatial integration and will be useful for future studies of the underlying neural substrates and models of binocular 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.