ArticleScientific reports2025
Characterization of contrast-mediated collinear interactions in the human visual system.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Collinear modulation represents a fundamental building block of our perceptual world, and its study has enhanced our understanding of contrast sensitivity, spatial integration, and neural plasticity in the visual system. In this phenomenon, the visibility of a target is influenced by collinear elements. Four key factors modulate this effect: the distance between target and flankers, the contrast of the flankers, retinal eccentricity, and spatial frequency. Each of these elements affects collinear modulation, increasing or reducing the target's visibility. Short target-to-flankers separations decrease contrast sensitivity, while larger separations increase it. However, this pattern holds for high contrast flankers, whereas low contrast flankers increase contrast sensitivity at short separations, while the effect is weaker or absent at large separations. Moreover, eccentricity appears to increase the spatial extent of inhibition. Across three experiments, we systematically varied these key factors. In Experiments 1 and 2, we manipulated spatial frequency, flankers' separation, and flankers' contrast in foveal vision. In Experiment 3, we varied flankers' separation and flankers' contrast in peripheral vision. The results reveal a complex pattern that may help reconcile previously conflicting findings in both healthy participants and clinical populations, offering an updated framework for the study of neural plasticity in the visual system.
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.