ArticleJournal of vision2024
Corrective mechanisms of motion extrapolation.
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 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.
- Regaining Visual Acuity Does Not Restore Motion Extrapolation Deficits in Amblyopia.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transmission and processing of sensory information in the visual system takes time. For motion perception, our brain can overcome this intrinsic neural delay through extrapolation mechanisms and accurately predict the current position of a continuously moving object. But how does the system behave when the motion abruptly changes and the prediction becomes wrong? Here we address this question by studying the perceived position of a moving object with various abrupt motion changes by human observers. We developed a task in which a bar is monotonously moving horizontally, and then motion suddenly stops, reverses, or disappears-then-reverses around two vertical stationary reference lines. Our results showed that participants overestimated the position of the stopping bar but did not perceive an overshoot in the motion reversal condition. When a temporal gap was added at the reverse point, the perceptual overshoot of the end point scaled with the gap durations. Our model suggests that the overestimation of the object position when it disappears is not linear as a function of its speeds but gradually fades out. These results can thus be reconciled in a single process where there is an interplay of the cortical motion prediction mechanisms and the late sensory transient visual inputs.
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.