ArticleeNeuro2026
Long-Term Variability in Visual Processing versus Perceptual Stability.
Article in eNeuro, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our brain is in constant change due to neural plasticity, but, still, our experience of the world feels relatively stable to us. Focusing on visual processing, we hypothesize that brain responses to stimuli may change over long periods of time, but in a way that is orthogonal to the dimensions that are relevant to stimulus category discrimination. To test this hypothesis, we acquired and analyzed a magnetoencephalography (MEG) dataset containing recordings from one female adult participant, with several scanning days spanning over 6 months. The participant passively attended to visual stimuli with the same stimulus presented within each session. We demonstrate that the specific scanning day can be predicted from the brain responses in a simple passive viewing paradigm, suggesting continuous temporal changes in neural activity over long time scales. However, information from one scanning day could be used to robustly decode the animacy of objects on a different scanning day, and importantly, decoding accuracy did not suffer with increasing time intervals between scans. That is, cross-decoding accuracy remained stable over months, despite between-scanning-day variability. These findings suggest that while processing of visual stimuli shows variability over long time scales, the core neural structure underlying object recognition remains stable and non-stimulus-specific. The results were validated in the open-access THINGS-MEG dataset, which employs a similar paradigm but covers a shorter longitudinal timespan. We find similar results across the four additional participants.
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.