Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41235869›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2025

Dynamic contrast sensitivity during human locomotion.

Brian Szekely, Paul R MacNeilage

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Actions as perceptual experiments.Journal of vision · 2026
    Review
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.

Brian SzekelyDepartment of Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, USA.
Paul R MacNeilageDepartment of Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, USA.

Funding

Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality CoreP20GM103650 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA RENO · PI WEBSTER, MICHAEL A · 2012 to 2022
$20.9M
NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM103650
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Locomotion poses a challenge to clear and stable vision. Reflexive head and eye movements act to stabilize the retinal image, but these do not act perfectly, so retinal image motion is increased during walking compared with standing. We nevertheless perceive the world as clear and stable during locomotion, suggesting that the visual system is well-adapted to meet the challenges posed by locomotion. To better understand these processes, we assessed dynamic contrast sensitivity during locomotion by presenting brief (24 ms) foveal Gabor targets (6°, 11 cpd) at threshold contrast to observers walking on a treadmill in an otherwise darkened room. Head and ankle motion were tracked, and presentation time was randomized, which allowed post hoc binning of responses according to stride-cycle timing to investigate how sensitivity is impacted by head motion and stride-cycle timing. Contrast sensitivity was improved during walking compared with standing over large portions of the stride cycle, except for epochs aligned with heel strikes, which drive large and unpredictable perturbations. This resulted in periodicity in contrast sensitivity at two cycles per stride, with additional oscillations observed at four and six cycles per stride. Pupil size was found to be moderately larger during walking compared with standing and also exhibited periodic fluctuations that were phase-locked to the stride cycle. Perceptual oscillations reflect the entrainment of visual processing by active behaviors. Robust contrast sensitivity during walking may be supported by action-contingent effects of locomotion on visual cortical activity that have been observed in several animal models.

Indexed as

Contrast SensitivityLocomotionMotion PerceptionWalkingAdultFemaleHead MovementsHumansMalePhotic StimulationYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID41235869
PMCPMC12637006

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.