ArticlePloS one2024
Visual short-term memory for crossed and uncrossed binocular disparities.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous work on visual short-term memory (VSTM) has encompassed various stimulus attributes including spatial frequency, color, and contrast, revealing specific time courses and a dependence on stimulus parameters. This study investigates visual short-term memory for binocular depth, using dynamic random dot stereograms (DRDS) featuring disparity planes in front of or behind the plane of fixation. In a delayed match-to-sample paradigm, we employed four distinct reference disparities (17.5', 28.8' either crossed or uncrossed) at two contrast levels (20%, 80%), spanning interstimulus intervals (ISI) of up to 4 s. Test stimuli represented a range of equally spaced values centered around the reference disparity of the ongoing trial. In addition, the impact of a memory masking stimulus was also tested in a separate experiment. Accuracy and point of subjective equality (PSE) served as performance markers. The performance, indicated by the accuracy of responses, was better for smaller reference disparities (±17.5') compared to larger ones (±28'), but both deteriorated as a function of ISI. The PSE demonstrated a consistent shift with increasing ISIs, irrespective of the magnitude of the initial disparity, converging gradually toward the range of 20-22' and deviating from the reference disparity. Notably, the influence of masking stimuli on the PSE was more marked when the mask disparity diverged from the reference value. The findings from our study indicate that the retention of absolute disparity in memory is imprecise, it deteriorates with retention time or due to perturbation by dissimilar masking stimuli. As a result, the memory trace is gradually replaced by a default depth value. This value could potentially signify an optimal point within low-level perceptual memory, however, our results are better explained by perceptual averaging whereby the visual system computationally derives a statistical summary of the presented disparities over time. The latter mechanism would aid in the computation of relative disparity in a dynamically changing environment.
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.