ArticleScientific reports2024
Response boosts serial dependence in the numerosity estimation task.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stronger reliance on visual perceptual history in individuals with higher math anxiety.BMC biology · 2025Article
- Exploring the role of serial dependence in visual time perception.Journal of vision · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Perceptions of current stimuli are sometimes biased toward or away from past perceptions. This phenomenon is called serial dependence. However, the strength of the effect of past responses on serial dependence has not been fully elucidated. We conducted experiments with a task in which participants estimated the number of dot arrays (numerosity estimation task) and directly compared whether the strength of serial dependence changed in the numerosity estimation task when participants responded or did not respond in the immediately preceding trial. We also examined whether the strength of serial dependence affected the accuracy of the numerosity estimation. We found that attractive serial dependence was stronger when participants responded in the immediately preceding trial than when they only saw the stimulus. The results suggest that the information from the previous stimulus must reach the higher-level processes associated with perceptual decisions to influence the estimation of the current stimulus. However, it is possible that the results of this study are specific to tasks in which participants respond with numeric symbols. The magnitude of the serial dependence effect was not observed to affect numerosity estimation performance, and no evidence was found that serial dependence enhances accuracy in the numerosity estimation task.
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.