Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38300565›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance2024

What drives the automatic retrieval of real-world object size knowledge?

Simen Hagen, Yuanfang Zhao, Lydia Moonen, Neele Ulken, Marius V Peelen

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 48% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Simen HagenDonders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University.ORCID 0000-0002-8293-9518
Yuanfang ZhaoDonders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University.
Lydia MoonenDonders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University.
Neele UlkenDonders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University.
Marius V PeelenDonders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University.ORCID 0000-0002-4026-7303
Radboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

European Research Council 725970European Union; Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Real-world object size is a behaviorally relevant object property that is automatically retrieved when viewing object images: participants are faster to indicate the bigger of two object images when this object is also bigger in the real world. What drives this size Stroop effect? One possibility is that it reflects the automatic retrieval of real-world size after objects are recognized at the basic level (e.g., recognizing an object as a plane activates large real-world size). An alternative possibility is that the size Stroop effect is driven by automatic associations between low-/mid-level visual features (e.g., rectilinearity) and real-world size, bypassing object recognition. Here, we tested both accounts. In Experiment 1, objects were displayed upright and inverted, slowing down recognition while equating visual features. Inversion strongly reduced the Stroop effect, indicating that object recognition contributed to the Stroop effect. Independently of inversion, however, trial-wise differences in rectilinearity also contributed to the Stroop effect. In Experiment 2, the Stroop effect was compared between manmade objects (for which rectilinearity was associated with size) and animals (no association between rectilinearity and size). The Stroop effect was larger for animals than for manmade objects, indicating that rectilinear feature differences were not necessary for the Stroop effect. Finally, in Experiment 3, unrecognizable "texform" objects that maintained size-related visual feature differences were displayed upright and inverted. Results revealed a small Stroop effect for both upright and inverted conditions. Altogether, these results indicate that the size Stroop effect partly follows object recognition with an additional contribution from visual feature associations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Indexed as

Recognition, PsychologyVisual PerceptionHumansPattern Recognition, VisualStroop Test

Identifiers

PMID38300565
PMCPMC7616435
OpenAlexW4391433882

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.