Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40540263›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2025

Use of target drift in heading judgments.

Li Li, Simon K Rushton, Rongrong Chen, Jing Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2025. 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.

Li LiFaculty of Arts and Science, New York University Shanghai, Shanghai, China.
Simon K RushtonSchool of Psychology, Cardiff University, Tower Building, Park Place, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Rongrong ChenDepartment of Psychology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.
Jing ChenFaculty of Arts and Science, New York University Shanghai, Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The change in direction of a target object relative to a translating observer (or a point fixed relative to the observer), "target drift," provides information about the observer's direction of self-movement (i.e., heading) with respect to the target. Relative drift rate (normalized with cues to motion-in-depth) provides information about the observer's absolute direction of heading relative to the surrounding scene. We investigated the utility of target drift by comparing heading judgments with target drift and "extra-drift" cues (the cues available in the changing optic array except target drift) in isolation and together during simulated forward translation. Across four experiments, we found that with the target drift cue alone, participants were able to make precise judgments of both nominal and absolute heading (≤1.53°). Judgments were at least as precise with the target drift cue alone as with extra-drift cues alone. The addition of extra-drift cues to the drift cue did not improve precision, and the pattern of reaction times suggests that the two cues are processed independently. We conclude that target drift can be an effective and powerful cue for heading judgments.

Indexed as

CuesJudgmentMotion PerceptionAdultDepth PerceptionFemaleHumansMalePhotic StimulationReaction TimeYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40540263
PMCPMC12184796

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.