ArticleExperimental brain research2025
Visual categorisation of images of familiar objects based on their authenticity: an fMRI study.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effectiveness of three-dimensional printed lumbar spine-model-based training for epidural anesthesia in novice anesthesiology residents.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Under most circumstances, we can rely visual information to quickly and accurately discriminate "real" objects (e.g., fresh fruit) from "fake" objects (e.g., plastic fruit). It is unclear, however, whether this distinction is made early along the ventral visual stream when basic object features such as colour (e.g., primary visual cortex; V1) and texture (e.g., collateral sulcus; COS) are being processed, or whether information regarding object authenticity is extracted in later visual or memory regions (e.g., perirhinal cortex, lateral occipital cortex). To examine this question, participants were placed in an fMRI scanner, and presented with 300 objects photographed in colour or greyscale. Half of the objects were fake, and the other half were real. The participant's task was to categorise each image as presenting either a real or fake object. Broadly, our analyses revealed significant activation in CoS when participants categorised real objects, particularly when they were presented in colour. We also observed activation in V1 for coloured objects, particularly real ones. These results suggest that our seemingly intuitive ability to rapidly discriminate real from fake objects occurs at the early stages of visual processing, such as when the brain is extracting surface-feature information like texture (CoS) or colour (V1). Future studies could consider the time course of these neural events and probe the importance of cross-modal (e.g., audition and haptic) information underpinning feature extraction for distinguishing real from fake 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.