ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2026
No error on the side of safety: No representational momentum for auditory looming stimuli.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Not proportional after all: Investigating speed perception with the beep-speed illusion.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The looming bias describes systematic differences in the perception of looming as compared to receding stimuli. To date, the most prominent and successful theory put forward to account for this bias is the adaptive bias theory, based on the more general error management theory framework, which argues for a perceptual bias for looming stimuli to err on the side of safety. We challenge this notion by providing evidence using the established probe comparison task from the representational momentum literature, in which the final stimulus configuration is probed. For intensity-changing sounds indicating looming/receding sound sources, no systematic overestimation in intensity change direction for the perceived final sound intensity of looming, approaching stimuli was observed. Across two auditory experiments using either classical sine wave (Experiment 1) or more complex tones (Experiment 2), we replicated the finding of no shift in intensity change direction for looming stimuli, even when accounting for general, change-independent biases. We provide an alternative framework, the speed prior account of motion perception, to explain the present, as well as further, currently unexplained findings in the literature.
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.