ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2024
Perceptual oddities: assessing the relationship between film editing and prediction processes.
Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rethinking Naturalistic Movie Neuroimaging Through Film Form.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- An exploration of the editing cut as an articulator in film through frequency domain analysis of spectator EEGs.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- Aesthetics and predictive processing: grounds and prospects of a fruitful encounter.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During film viewing, humans parse sequences of individual shots into larger narrative structures, often weaving transitions at edit points into an apparently seamless and continuous flow. Editing helps filmmakers manipulate visual transitions to induce feelings of fluency/disfluency, tension/relief, curiosity, expectation and several emotional responses. We propose that the perceptual dynamics induced by film editing can be captured by a predictive processing (PP) framework. We hypothesise that visual discontinuities at edit points produce discrepancies between anticipated and actual sensory input, leading to prediction error. Further, we propose that the magnitude of prediction error depends on the predictability of each shot within the narrative flow, and lay out an account based on conflict monitoring. We test this hypothesis in two empirical studies measuring electroencephalography (EEG) during passive viewing of film excerpts, as well as behavioural responses during an active edit detection task. We report the neural and behavioural modulations at editing boundaries across three levels of narrative depth, showing greater modulations for edits spanning less predictable, deeper narrative transitions. Overall, our contribution lays the groundwork for understanding film editing from a PP perspective. This article is part of the theme issue 'Art, aesthetics and predictive processing: theoretical and empirical perspectivess'.
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.