Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38558003›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Short communication: Binocular rivalry dynamics during locomotion.

Brian Szekely, Robert Keys, Paul MacNeilage, David Alais

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 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 46% 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Brian SzekelyDepartment of Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno, Reno, Nevada, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9502-0984
Robert KeysSchool of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Paul MacNeilageDepartment of Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno, Reno, Nevada, United States of America.
David AlaisSchool of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AUUniversity of Nevada, Reno · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Locomotion has been shown to impact aspects of visual processing in both humans and animal models. In the current study, we assess the impact of locomotion on the dynamics of binocular rivalry. We presented orthogonal gratings, one contrast-modulating at 0.8 Hz (matching average step frequency) and the other at 3.2 Hz, to participants using a virtual reality headset. We compared two conditions: stationary and walking. We continuously monitored participants' foot position using tracking devices to measure the step cycle. During the walking condition, participants viewed the rivaling gratings for 60-second trials while walking on a circular path in a virtual reality environment. During the stationary condition, observers viewed the same stimuli and environment while standing still. The task was to continuously indicate the dominant percept via button press using handheld controllers. We found no significant differences between walking and standing for normalized dominance duration distributions, mean normalized dominance distributions, mean alternation rates, or mean fitted frequencies. Although our findings do not align with prior research highlighting distinctions in normalized dominance distributions between walking and standing, our study contributes unique evidence indicating that alternation rates vary across the step cycle. Specifically, we observed that the number of alternations is at its lowest during toe-off phases and reaches its peak at heel strike. This novel insight enhances our understanding of the dynamic nature of alternation patterns throughout the step cycle.

Indexed as

Virtual RealityVision, BinocularHumansPhotic StimulationVision DisparityVisual PerceptionWalking

Identifiers

PMID38558003
PMCPMC10984525
OpenAlexW4393393280

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.