ArticlePNAS nexus2024
Binocular rivalry under naturalistic geometry: Evidence from worlds simulated in virtual reality.
Article in PNAS nexus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Binocular rivalry is a fascinating, widely studied visual phenomenon in which perception alternates between two competing images. This experience, however, is generally restricted to laboratory settings where two irreconcilable images are presented separately to the two eyes, an implausible geometry where two objects occupy the same physical location. Such laboratory experiences are in stark contrast to everyday visual behavior, where rivalry is almost never encountered, casting doubt on whether rivalry is relevant to our understanding of everyday binocular vision. To investigate the external validity of binocular rivalry, we manipulated the geometric plausibility of rival images using a naturalistic, cue-rich, 3D-corridor model created in virtual reality. Rival stimuli were presented in geometrically implausible, semi-plausible, or plausible layouts. Participants tracked rivalry fluctuations in each of these three layouts and for both static and moving rival stimuli. Results revealed significant and canonical binocular rivalry alternations regardless of geometrical plausibility and stimulus type. Rivalry occurred for layouts that mirrored the unnatural geometry used in laboratory studies and for layouts that mimicked real-world occlusion geometry. In a complementary 3D modeling analysis, we show that interocular conflict caused by geometrically plausible occlusion is a common outcome in a visual scene containing multiple objects. Together, our findings demonstrate that binocular rivalry can reliably occur for both geometrically implausible interocular conflicts and conflicts caused by a common form of naturalistic occlusion. Thus, key features of binocular rivalry are not simply laboratory artifacts but generalize to conditions that match the geometry of everyday 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.