ArticleJournal of vision2024
Systematic transition from boundary extension to contraction along an object-to-scene continuum.
Article in Journal of vision, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Boundary extension during naturalistic viewing.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Object-based attention during scene perception elicits boundary contraction in memory.Memory & cognition · 2025Article
- Immersive scene representation in human visual cortex with ultra-wide-angle neuroimaging.Nature communications · 2024Article
- A generative model of memory construction and consolidation.Nature human behaviour · 2024Article
- Immersive scene representation in human visual cortex with ultra-wide angle neuroimaging.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Spatial Scene Memories Are Biased Towards a Fixed Amount of Semantic Information.Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2023Article
- A tutorial on capturing mental representations through drawing and crowd-sourced scoring.Behavior research methods · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
After viewing a picture of an environment, our memory of it typically extends beyond what was presented, a phenomenon referred to as boundary extension. But, sometimes memory errors show the opposite pattern-boundary contraction-and the relationship between these phenomena is controversial. We constructed virtual three-dimensional environments and created a series of views at different distances, from object close-ups to wide-angle indoor views, and tested for memory errors along this object-to-scene continuum. Boundary extension was evident for close-scale views and transitioned parametrically to boundary contraction for far-scale views. However, this transition point was not tied to a specific position in the environment (e.g., the point of reachability). Instead, it tracked with judgments of the best-looking view of the environment, in both rich-object and low-object environments. We offer a dynamic-tension account, where competition between object-based and scene-based affordances determines whether a view will extend or contract in memory. This study demonstrates that boundary extension and boundary contraction are not two separate phenomena but rather two parts of a continuum, suggesting a common underlying mechanism. The transition point between the two is not fixed but depends on the observer's judgment of the best-looking view of the environment. These findings provide new insights into how we perceive and remember a view of environment.
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.