Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40747968›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2025

Symmetrical and asymmetrical distortions in time and numerosity perception induced by chunked stimuli.

Zhichao Xue, Xiangyong Yuan, Yi Jiang

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. 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

3 authors.

Zhichao XueState Key Laboratory of Cognitive Science and Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
Xiangyong YuanState Key Laboratory of Cognitive Science and Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
Yi JiangState Key Laboratory of Cognitive Science and Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The (co)representation of time and numerosity has long been a topic of enduring interest. While a theory of magnitude (ATOM) posits that these dimensions are governed by a shared representational system, empirical findings offer both supporting and conflicting evidence. Previous challenging research has highlighted that time and numerosity perception can be distorted in opposite directions by explicitly introducing emotional or cognitive interference. However, it remains unclear whether time and numerosity can spontaneously dissociate during stimulus processing. To this end, we tested the time and numerosity distortions caused by different kinds of chunked stimuli, including collinearity, illusory contours (ICs), and biological motion (BM). The results showed that collinearity caused the same amount of overestimation for both time and numerosity, whereas ICs caused only numerosity underestimation and BM caused only time overestimation. Notably, no consistent correlations emerged between the magnitudes of temporal and numerical distortion across the three stimulus types. These findings suggest that time and numerosity perception can be symmetrically or asymmetrically distorted depending on the nature of chunked stimuli, providing converging evidence for partially dissociable representations of time and numerosity. The close relationship observed between these two dimensions may instead reflect shared constraints within a broader framework of information processing.

Indexed as

Form PerceptionIllusionsMotion PerceptionPerceptual DistortionTime PerceptionAdultFemaleHumansMalePhotic StimulationYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40747968
PMCPMC12327536

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.