ArticlePloS one2024
Divergent mechanisms of perceptual reversals in spinning and wobbling structure-from-motion stimuli.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comprehensive dataset of features describing eye-gaze dynamics across multiple tasks.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Analysis of Top-Down Perceptual Modulation Considering Eye Fixations Made on a Bistable Logo.Journal of eye movement research · 2026Article
- Visual reversals and biases while observing ambiguous spinning biological motion and rigid structure-from-motion.PloS one · 2026Article
- Visual imagination can influence visual perception - towards an experimental paradigm to measure imagination.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Dynamics of visual reversals from ambiguous spinning biological-motion and rigid structure-from-motion.i-PerceptionArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study explores the visual phenomenon of random dot structure-from-motion (SFM), where the brain perceives 3D shapes from the coordinated 2D motion of dots. Observing SFM may lead to ambiguous depth relations that reverse back and forth during prolonged viewing. I demonstrate that different processes are involved in triggering perceived reversals for identical SFM shapes involved in spinning and wobbling motion. Durations of stable percepts were measured while human participants viewed the two SFM stimuli, and also a static Necker figure, and a wobbling Necker figure for two sets of 2.5 minutes each. The results showed that wobbling SFM resulted in much longer stable durations compared to the other stimuli. The durations for the wobbling SFM stimuli was not correlated with the spinning SFM, or the two Necker stimuli. Yet, such correlations were obtained between the other stimuli. It is known that reversals obtained while viewing spinning SFM stimuli involves bottom-up driven adaptation and recovery cycles between neural populations. This result suggests that wobbling SFM efficiently deactivates this process and targets other contributions to the reversals, such as top-down processes. In addition, biases observed in the first set disappeared in the second set implying influences of learning between the sets. Imagery vividness, which measures intrinsic top-down processes, was also scored but no correlation between scores in visual imagery and reversal rates were obtained. This research provides insight into the complex interplay between bottom-up driven adaptation-recovery cycles, and top-down processes in ambiguous perception.
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.