ArticleScientific reports2025
Visual outdoor space perception.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- The visual perception of outdoor angular spatial relationships.Journal of vision · 2026Article
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
Visual space perception has been a topic of sustained research since the nineteenth century. Much of this research into the geometry of visual space, however, required observers to make judgments about spatial relationships between isolated points in total darkness. While a sizeable number of previous investigations have now explored visual space perception in outdoor natural environments, nearly all of the previous investigations evaluating the curvature of visual space have utilized only small numbers of observers. In the current experiment, a large number (30) of observers adjusted triangular configurations of markers in an outdoor field until they appeared either as equilateral or right triangles in depth. There was a wide range of outcomes, such that the observers' judgments were consistent with elliptic, Euclidean, and hyperbolic geometry. There is thus no single consistent relationship between physical space and perceived space. Furthermore, the geometry of visual space frequently changes as the size of spatial configurations is varied-for many observers, judgments for small configurations are consistent with elliptic or Euclidean geometry while judgments for large configurations are frequently consistent with hyperbolic geometry.
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.