Susceptibility to the Shepard illusion in participants with autism: reduced top‐down influences within perception?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous research [Ropar & Mitchell, 2002] has shown that autistic individuals are somewhat immune to biases induced by top-down processes, particularly the influence of previous knowledge on perception. In order to test this hypothesis within perception, 18 participants with autism who had measured intelligence in the normal range were compared against 18 matched controls in their susceptibility to the Shepard illusion. The illusion consists in misperceiving the shape of a parallelogram in the presence of depth cues. It is attributed [Mitchell, Ropar, Ackroyd, & Rajendran, 2005] to the effect of top-down constraints within perception. The task involved adjusting a stimulus to the dimensions of a template on a computer screen. Both groups were susceptible to the illusion and the illusion effect was stronger when three-dimensional perspective cues were prominent. Notably, participants with autism were less susceptible to the illusion than typically developing individuals. The findings raise the possibility that in some instances top-down influences are attenuated in individuals with autism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it