ArticleJournal of vision2025
Does surface completion fail to support uncrowding?
Article in Journal of vision, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dynamics of vision: Grouping takes longer than crowding.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Perceptual organization is limited in peripheral vision: Evidence from configural superiority.Journal of vision · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In crowding, perception of a target deteriorates in the presence of nearby elements. As the entire stimulus configuration across large parts of the visual field influences crowding and not just nearby elements, low-level explanations, such as local pooling, do not suffice. To explain the effects of stimulus configuration, grouping was proposed as the key, and we implemented these ideas in a neural network model (LAMINART). In a recent publication, Moore and Zheng (2024) used a set of stimuli designed to induce surface completion cues, such as occlusion, and found that they had no effect on crowding. Based on these results, the authors questioned the role of grouping in crowding. Here we show that the stimuli Moore and Zheng used do not induce the intended perceptual occlusion effects. Hence, their conclusions are not warranted. Additionally, simulations of the LAMINART model explain the results of Moore and Zheng with the existing model characteristics.
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.