ReviewPsychonomic bulletin & review2026
Simulating object recognition with the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) model.
Review 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.
- Simulating object recognition with the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) model.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Object recognition is the ability to discriminate previously encountered objects from novel ones, typically inferred from exploratory preferences. It is usually treated as a form of recognition memory. A central idea is that both nonassociative and associative processes contribute, organized around priming: a stimulus is processed less, and therefore explored less, when its representation is already primed at the moment of encounter. Priming can arise from the stimulus's own recent activation (self-priming) or from associative cueing by context or other stimuli (associative priming). Allan Wagner's Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) model provides a quantitative framework for these two components, yet prior evaluations of this model have remained qualitative. Here, we specify a numerical implementation of SOP for the principal object-recognition procedures and their key manipulations (retention and interstimulus intervals, and spatial displacement). We then simulate three widely replicated experiments: spontaneous object recognition, relative recency, and object-in-place. The model quantitatively captures the canonical preferences (novel > familiar, remote > recent, displaced > nondisplaced) and aligns with the core features of recent datasets. Beyond fitting existing results, SOP has substantial heuristic value. Our analysis points to concrete future experiments that manipulate object locations, interstimulus spacing, distractor load, and arousal to dissociate associative from nonassociative influences.
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.