MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143024597 · doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00337

Visual Prior Entry

2001· article· en· W2143024597 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Science · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCognitive psychologyResponse biasInterpretation (philosophy)Visual perceptionSocial psychologyPerceptionNeuroscienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has long been claimed that attended stimuli are perceived prior to unattended stimuli--doctrine of prior entry. Most, if not all, studies on which such claims have been based, however, are open to a nonattentional interpretation involving response bias, leading some researchers to assert that prior entry may not exist. Given this controversy, we introduce a novel methodology to minimize the effect of response bias by manipulating attention and response demands in orthogonal dimensions. Attention was oriented to the left or right (ie., spatially), but instead of reporting on the basis of location, observers reported the order (first or second) of vertical versus horizontal line segments. Although second-order response biases were demonstrated, effects of attention in accordance with the law of prior entry were clearly obtained following both exogenous and endogenous attentional cuing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.119
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.326 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it