ArticleNeuroscience of consciousness2025
The complexity of human subjective experience during binocular rivalry.
Article in Neuroscience of consciousness, 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.
- Differential effects of attention and contrast on transition appearance during binocular rivalry.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- The complexity of human subjective experience during binocular rivalry.Neuroscience of consciousness · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our subjective experience of the sensory information is rich and complex. Yet, typical cognitive and perception psychology paradigms reduce it to a few predefined discrete categories, like yes/no answers or the Likert scales. In the current study, we examined the complexity of subjective visual experience during binocular rivalry, a major experimental paradigm used to study conscious visual perception and its neural mechanisms. Binocular rivalry occurs when the two eyes are presented with two different images that cannot be fused into a uniform percept. As a result, the conscious perception alternates between the two images with brief transition phases in between. Fifty-two subjects viewed binocular rivalry produced by pairs of stimuli with different visual information (images, orthogonal gratings, or moving dots). After each rivalry period, they indicated how many different transition types they perceived and described their perception of each transition type. Using content analysis, we identified 20 unique categories over all subjects, sessions, and stimuli. On average, participants reported 2-3 unique transition categories for each visual stimulus combination. The categories were consistent for each observer over time but varied across participants and stimulus content. Our results show that perceptual transitions during binocular rivalry appear in different forms and depend on the specific visual stimulus content that induces rivalry. Our findings have implications for neuroimaging studies of binocular rivalry, which may yield different results depending on the exact experience of transitions. They also demonstrate how the complexity of subjective visual experience may be underestimated in traditional perception paradigms.
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.