Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38812612›Full record

Articlei-Perception

When is a disparity not a disparity? Toward an old theory of three-dimensional vision.

Brian Rogers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in i-Perception. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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. 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

1 author.

Brian RogersExperimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8825-2493

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aims of this paper are twofold: first, to discuss and analyze the concept of binocular disparity and second, to contrast the traditional "air theory" of three-dimensional vision with the much older "ground theory," first suggested by Ibn al-Haytham more than a thousand years ago. The origins of an "air theory" of perception can be traced back to Descartes and subsequently to the philosopher George Berkeley, who claimed that distance "could not be seen" because points lying along the same line of sight (in an empty space) would all project to the same location on the retina. However, Descartes was also aware that the angle of convergence of the two eyes could solve the problem of the "missing" information for the monocular observer and, since then, most visual scientists have assumed that eye vergence plays an important role both in judging absolute distance and for scaling retinal size and binocular disparities. In contrast, al-Haytham's and Gibson's "ground theories," which are based on the geometry of the textured ground plane surface that has surrounded us throughout evolution and during our lifetimes, are not just more ecologically based but they also obviate the need for

Indexed as

binocular visioncontours/surfacescue combinationdepthoptic flowperceptionscene perceptionstereopsisthree-dimensional perception

Identifiers

PMID38812612
PMCPMC11134170

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.