Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40708673›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2025

The effect of vection on the use of optic flow cues.

Meaghan McManus, Katja Fiehler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

2 authors.

Meaghan McManusPsychology, Justus Liebig University Giessen, Giessen, Hessen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7262-0757
Katja FiehlerPsychology, Justus Liebig University Giessen, Giessen, Hessen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9682-444X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When we move objects move past us in a relative pattern of motion referred to as optic flow. Modulations in optic flow can impact both our perception of self-motion (e.g. perceived distance travelled) and our feeling of self-motion, referred to as vection (e.g. speed of self-motion). The perception and feeling of self-motion have so far been studied independently, leaving open whether and how the two relate to each other. In the current study, stationary participants performed a self-motion task in virtual reality where they moved to previously indicated distances using constant velocity optic flow. The perception of self-motion was measured as the ratio between the distance to travel and the distance travelled, where stopping sooner indicates that the optic flow cues were more effective in creating the perception of self-motion. Vection experience was measured via a questionnaire. When participants felt vection, there was a correlation between stopping distance (reflecting the perception of self-motion) and the felt speed of vection (reflecting the feeling of self-motion), i.e. the faster participants felt they were moving the sooner they stopped. These results show that the perception and feeling of self-motion are linked and that treating the two concepts independently can lead to misinterpretations.

Indexed as

optic flowself-motionvectionvirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID40708673
PMCPMC12289190

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.