Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42852993›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2026

Ocularity modulates the dominance of spatial over temporal influences in binocular rivalry.

Lisa Beckmann, Thomas Schenk, Karin Ludwig

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2026. 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.

Lisa BeckmannClinical Neuropsychology, Department of Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Thomas SchenkClinical Neuropsychology, Department of Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Karin LudwigClinical Neuropsychology, Department of Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The perception of a binocular rivalry (BR) stimulus can be influenced by other stimuli in temporal or spatial proximity. Here, we investigate how spatial (surround inhibition [SI]) and temporal context (flash suppression [FS]) interact. Previously, we modulated these influences by varying surround contrast in SI and timing parameters in FS. In the present study, we make use of the fact that the strengths of the two contexts can also be manipulated in the same way, namely by modulating ocularity. We varied FS strength by showing the prime to the same eye as the identical probe or to the other eye. Spatial influence was varied by presenting the surround to the same eye as the matching center, to the other eye, or to both. Temporal and spatial influences were mostly additive when biasing perception in the same direction. Some combinations were so strong that the dominant percept could be predicted almost perfectly. This may help in deliberately creating desired perceptual outcomes in future studies. Spatial context tended to dominate in conflicting situations. When both context types were presented interocularly (and presumably weaker), however, temporal context had the edge. This may reflect the unexpectedly strong interocular FS: the interocular constellation weakened FS much less than SI, suggesting differences in hierarchical processing levels. Thus, comparing interocular conditions may have been less informative than anticipated. Still, when the conflicting influences were both working intraocularly, spatial context dominated, consistent with previous findings.

Indexed as

Dominance, OcularSpace PerceptionVision, BinocularVision DisparityContrast SensitivityHumansPhotic Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID42852993
PMCPMC13676251

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.