Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42373576›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of neuroscience2026

The Brain Response to Reflectional Symmetry Is Not Uniquely Preattentive.

Ned Buckley, Alexis D J Makin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

2 authors.

Ned BuckleyDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Eleanor Rathbone Building, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0009-0006-5252-3841
Alexis D J MakinDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Eleanor Rathbone Building, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4490-7400

Funding

ESRC ES/S014691/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

EEG can be used to measure the brain response to visual regularity. Reflectional symmetry generates an event-related potential (ERP) named the sustained posterior negativity (SPN). The SPN for reflectional symmetry is generated automatically, whatever the participant's task. This may be because reflectional symmetry has a fundamental role in perceptual organization and guiding adaptive behaviour. In contrast, other types of regularity, such as glass patterns, do not have this ecological significance. We thus predicted that the glass pattern SPN would be more susceptible to experimental variations of task than the reflection SPN. To test this prediction, we ran three experiments on three different groups of 52 participants. All participants saw the same random, reflection and glass dot dipole stimuli. The stimuli were either black or white. In the Regularity Task, participants discriminated whether the patterns were random or regular (where regular means reflection or glass). In the Luminance task, participants discriminated whether the patterns were black or white. In the Cross task, participants discriminated whether the vertical or horizontal arm of the central fixation cross was longer. As predicted, both the reflection and glass SPN were largest in the Regularity task, reduced in the Luminance task and reduced again in the Cross task. Contrary to predictions, glass pattern SPNs were less affected by task than reflection SPNs. This unexpected result suggests that glass patterns may even be processed more automatically than reflection, although this would require replication before it is treated as secure knowledge.

Indexed as

AttentionBrainEvoked PotentialsPattern Recognition, VisualAdultElectroencephalographyFemaleHumansMalePhotic StimulationYoung AdultEEGERPsglass patternsreflectionsustained posterior negativitysymmetry

Identifiers

PMID42373576
PMCPMC13314561

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.