Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39635147›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2024

Dazzle camouflage: benefits and problems revealed.

P George Lovell, Rebecca J Sharman, Tim S Meese

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Dazzle camouflage: benefits and problems revealed.Royal Society open science · 2024
    Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

P George LovellDivision of Psychology & Forensic Sciences, Abertay University, Bell Street, Dundee DD1 1HG, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6359-8463
Rebecca J SharmanDivision of Psychology & Forensic Sciences, Abertay University, Bell Street, Dundee DD1 1HG, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9193-3054
Tim S MeeseCentre for Vision & Hearing Research, Aston University, Aston Street, Birmingham B4 7ET, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3744-4679

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During WWI, ships were painted in high-contrast 'dazzle' patterns believed to distort, among other things, submariners' perceptions of direction when aiming their torpedoes, but was this strategy effective? Here, we investigated the effects of different camouflage patterns, including versions used in the war, on the perceived direction of travel for a three-dimensional computer model of the RMS Mauretania. The results of this study showed that texture gradients 'twisted' the perceived direction of the ship, the effect being ~10° for a regular pattern of circles. We also found a second, larger effect, 'hysteresis', that biased perceived target directions to parallel the horizon for directions of travel within approximately ±30° of 90° (left-right). Hysteresis persisted outside this central plateau, causing perceived directions to be offset from veridical. The twist and hysteresis effects combined linearly and were constructive (enhancing protection) or destructive (diminishing protection) depending on the directions of (i) travel and (ii) the 'twisting' texture gradients. However, the strength of hysteresis reduced as a function of experience. Our simulated torpedo attacks suggest that systematic perceptual distortion of direction by dazzle might have been effective only where submariners had low hysteresis and ships were fast enough to benefit from the perceptual error imposed by twist.

Indexed as

camouflagedazzle camouflagedirectionperceptionpsychophysicsvision

Identifiers

PMID39635147
PMCPMC11614542

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.