Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39588128›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024

Progressive changes in binocular perception from stereopsis to rivalry.

Yohske Hasegawa, Hirohito M Kondo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Yohske HasegawaSchool of Psychology, Chukyo University, Nagoya, Japan.
Hirohito M KondoSchool of Psychology, Chukyo University, Nagoya, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The binocular system provides a stereoscopic view from slightly different retinal images and produces perceptual alternations, namely, binocular rivalry, from significantly different retinal images. When we observe a stereogram in which the stimulus configurations induce stereopsis and rivalry simultaneously, the binocular system prefers stereopsis to rivalry. However, changes in visual perception are yet to be investigated by parametrically manipulating the components of a stereogram. Methods: We examined stereopsis preferences in stereograms with various horizontal disparities. The stereograms of our paradigms included horizontal and vertical bars in one eye and a vertical bar alone in the other. Under experimental conditions, the vertical bar superimposed on the horizontal bar varied its position relative to the opposite vertical bar: range of horizontal disparity, 0.0' to 42.3'. The superimposed vertical bar was absent under the control condition. Observers were instructed to indicate the disappearance of monocular horizontal bars, that is, targets, from their perception during the 30-s trials. Results: The total disappearance duration decreased under experimental conditions compared with that under control conditions, and it gradually increased with an increase in the disparity of the stereoscopic vertical bars. Discussion: These results indicate that the disparity in the stereoscopic components biases binocular perception away from the rivalry between the vertical and horizontal bars toward the stereopsis of the vertical bars. Furthermore, the disappearance duration showed a unimodal and asymmetric distribution across all disparity conditions. This suggests that rivalry processing occurs in parallel when stereopsis is dominant. We found that stereopsis preference is an outcome of binocular perception selection biased by disparity.

Indexed as

ambiguous perceptionbinocular rivalrydisparitymonocular imagestereopsis

Identifiers

PMID39588128
PMCPMC11586168

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.