ArticleBehavior research methods2026
Drawings of THINGS: A large-scale drawing dataset of 1854 object concepts.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The development of large datasets of natural images has galvanized progress in psychology, neuroscience, and computer science. Notably, the THINGS database constitutes a collective effort towards understanding of human visual knowledge by accumulating rich data on a shared set of visual object concepts across several studies. In this paper, we introduce Drawing of THINGS ( DoT ), a novel dataset of 28,627 human drawings of 1854 diverse object concepts, sampled systematically from concrete picturable and nameable nouns in the American English language, mirroring the structure of the THINGS image database. In addition to data on drawings' stroke history, we further collected fine-grained recognition data for each drawing, along with metadata on participant demographics, drawing ability, and mental imagery. We characterize people's ability to communicate and recognize semantic information encoded in drawings and compare this ability to their ability to recognize real-world images of the same visual objects. We also explore the relationship between drawing understanding and the memorability and typicality of the objects contained in THINGS. In sum, we envision DoT as a powerful tool that builds on the THINGS database to advance understanding of how humans express knowledge about visual concepts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.