Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41755987›Full record

Articlei-Perception

Using perception as a strategy: Camouflage, surprise, and the moment of shock related to perception.

Claus-Christian Carbon, Boris Dreyer, Marcus Speck

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in i-Perception. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Claus-Christian CarbonDepartment of General Psychology and Methodology, University of Bamberg, Bavaria, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3446-9347
Boris DreyerDepartment of History, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Bavaria, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4473-0534
Marcus SpeckDepartment of Chemistry and Pharmacy, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Bavaria, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4186-8669

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Camouflage is often conceived as the art of hiding, but a more striking perceptual power lies in the moment of revelation. Drawing on historical evidence from Roman patrol vessels on the Danube, we, as an interdisciplinary team of historians, chemists, and perceptual psychologists, argue that concealment was strategically coupled with surprise to produce psychological shock. These vessels were painted to blend with their surroundings, yet their sudden detection triggered a perceptual "pop-out," amplified by dramatic features such as oversized eyes and ornamental bows. This specific quality, which is most obvious in a frontal attack mode, allowed a quick transition from invisibility to an imposing, fear-inducing presence that created a tactical advantage that disrupted enemy attention, motor preparation, and predictive coding. Roman shipbuilders seemingly exploited perceptual principles such as figure-ground reversal, attentional capture, and even Müller-Lyer-like illusions to manipulate enemy perception. Thus, camouflage was not merely defensive concealment but an active strategy of temporal control, staging perception itself as a weapon. Studying these dynamics highlights how surprise can destabilize observers and decisively shift the balance of confrontation.

Indexed as

attackcamouflageeyesfearGermanicperceptionRoman Empirestrategy and tacticssurprisewarships

Identifiers

PMID41755987
PMCPMC12932871

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.