Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40416819›Full record

Articlei-Perception

Reassessing the curvature effect in tables and chairs.

Erick G Chuquichambi, Tobiasz Trawinski, Enric Munar, Letizia Palumbo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in i-Perception. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Erick G ChuquichambiHuman Evolution and Cognition Group (EvoCog), University of the Balearic Islands, Palma, Balearic Islands, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5389-283X
Tobiasz TrawinskiSchool of Psychology, Liverpool Hope University, Liverpool, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5285-4559

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several studies have consistently demonstrated that people generally prefer curved over angular contours. However, the magnitude of the curvature effect varies across stimuli, for example, with a larger effect reported for abstract stimuli compared to interior spaces. A comparison across stimuli that share similar physical features and belong to the same categories is warranted to determine whether curvature is a basis of object preference. Another important question is whether inspection differences, based on contour and object category, affect object preference. In Experiment 1, we addressed these questions by recording eye movements as participants rated their preferences for images of two types of common-use objects: tables and chairs. In Experiment 2, we limited the stimuli presentation to 84 ms, as brief presentations are thought to enhance the curvature effect. Neither of the two experiments confirmed a clear preference for curvature in tables or chairs. Yet, curvature significantly influenced fixation durations, with curvilinear tables eliciting longer fixations than rectilinear ones, although without affecting overall preference. The findings are discussed in the context of familiarity and object functionality in shaping preference judgements.

Indexed as

curvatureeye movementsobject categoryvisual preference

Identifiers

PMID40416819
PMCPMC12099157

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.