ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2026
Border-ownership reversals determine the strength of metacontrast masking.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Visual objects can be rendered invisible if their borders are assigned to other objects, showing that border-ownership (BO) is critical for perception. Objects can also be rendered invisible by using masking to limit the amount of time the brain has to process the object. An example of this is metacontrast masking (MM). MM occurs when an object is briefly presented and is followed by the presentation of a mask with closely adjacent contours. The mask can render the target object invisible, even though the target object is processed in high level brain areas. We propose that a critical factor that determines whether the target is perceived or not, is the amount of time that the target object retains ownership of its borders. What many MM paradigms have in common, is that when the mask appears, it reverses the directions of ownership at the borders of the previously presented target object. We hypothesized that this reversal in BO disrupts recurrent processing of the target object and impair perception. Here we tested this hypothesis by designing new MM paradigms with masks that either reverse ownership of the borders of the target object or not. We consistently found that masking was stronger when the mask gained ownership of the borders of the target object than when border ownership was unaffected by the mask. Our results indicate that prolonged ownership of borders is crucial for creating a stable model of the world, which enables the perception of stimuli.
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.