ArticleJournal of vision2025
Impaired visual perceptual accuracy in the upper visual field induces asymmetric performance in position estimation for falling and rising objects.
Article in Journal of vision, 2025. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humans can estimate the time and position of a moving object's arrival. However, numerous studies have demonstrated superior position estimation accuracy for descending objects compared with ascending objects. We tested whether the accuracy of position estimation for ascending and descending objects differs between the upper and lower visual fields. Using a head-mounted display, participants observed a target object ascending or descending toward a goal located at 8.7° or 17.1° above or below from the center of the monitor in the upper and lower visual fields, respectively. Participants pressed a key to match the time of the target's arrival at the goal, with the gaze kept centered. For goals (8.7°) close to the center, ascending and descending objects were equally accurate, whereas for goals (17.1°) far from the center, the ascending target's position estimation in the upper visual field was inferior to the others. Targets moved away from the center for goals further from the center and closer to the center for goals nearer to the center. As the positional accuracy of ascending and descending objects was not assessed for each of the four goals, it remains unclear which was more important for impaired accuracy: the proximity of the target position or direction of the upward or downward motion. However, taken together with previous studies, we suggest that estimating the position of objects moving further away from the central fovea of the upper visual field may have contributed to the asymmetry in position estimation for ascending and descending objects.
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.