Sex Differences and Spatial Separation in the Poggendorff Illusion
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
This study examined the responses of 40 undergraduate women and 40 men to two Poggendorff figures, a traditional figure with the right oblique line omitted and a modified variant with the left vertical line and the right oblique line absent. Participants placed a dot on the right vertical line where the oblique line, if extended, would intersect the right vertical line. The results showed that women displayed larger illusions than men on both figures, consistent with past findings. Finding a sex difference with the modified variant did not support the suggestion that the intersection between the oblique and vertical lines is responsible for such differences. The effects of spatial separation and size of acute angle were similar for both versions of the illusion. The effects of spatial separation were inconsistent with an explanation of the illusion based on depth cues and it was suggested that an explanation of the Poggendorff illusion should focus on processing between the vertical lines.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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