Multistable Perception in Older Adults: Constructing a Whole from Fragments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Visual perception is constructive in nature; that is, a coherent whole is generated from ambiguous fragments that are encountered in dynamic visual scenes. Creating this coherent whole from fragmented sensory inputs requires one to detect, identify, distinguish and organize sensory input. The organization of fragments into a coherent whole is facilitated by the continuous interactions between lower level sensory inputs and higher order processes. However, age-related declines are found in both neural structures and cognitive processes (e.g., attention and inhibition). The impact of these declines on the constructive nature of visual processing was the focus of this study. Here we asked younger adults, young-old (65-79 years), and old-old adults (80+ years) to view a multistable figure (i.e., Necker cube) under four conditions (free, priming, volition, and adaptation) and report, via a button press, when percepts spontaneously changed. The oldest-olds, unlike young-olds and younger adults, were influenced by priming, had less visual stability during volition and showed less ability to adapt to multistable stimuli. These results suggest that the ability to construct a coherent whole from fragments declines with age. More specifically, vision is constructed differently in the old-olds, which might influence environmental interpretations and navigational abilities in this age group.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".