ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2025
Enhanced and idiosyncratic neural representations of personally typical scenes.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 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.
- Characterizing internal models of the visual environment.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Review
- Enhanced and idiosyncratic neural representations of personally typical scenes.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 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
Abstract
Previous research shows that the typicality of visual scenes (i.e. if they are good examples of a category) determines how easily they can be perceived and represented in the brain. However, the unique visual diets individuals are exposed to across their lifetimes should sculpt very personal notions of typicality. Here, we thus investigated whether scenes that are more typical to individual observers are more accurately perceived and represented in the brain. We used drawings to enable participants to describe typical scenes (e.g. a kitchen) and converted these drawings into three-dimensional renders. These renders were used as stimuli in a scene categorization task, during which we recorded electroencephalography (EEG). In line with previous findings, categorization was most accurate for renders resembling the typical scene drawings of individual participants. Our EEG analyses reveal two critical insights on how these individual differences emerge on the neural level. First, personally typical scenes yielded enhanced neural representations from around 200 ms after onset. Second, personally typical scenes were represented in idiosyncratic ways, with reduced dependence on high-level visual features. We interpret these findings in a predictive processing framework, where individual differences in internal models of scene categories formed through experience shape visual analysis in idiosyncratic ways.
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.