MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2468642560 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0158566

Looking without Perceiving: Impaired Preattentive Perceptual Grouping in Autism Spectrum Disorder

2016· article· en· W2468642560 on OpenAlexafffund
Tiffany A. Carther-Krone, Sarah Shomstein, Jonathan J. Marotta

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNational Eye InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsIllusionPerceptionCognitive psychologyPsychologyAutism spectrum disorderVisual perceptionAutismVisual processingDevelopmental psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Before becoming aware of a visual scene, our perceptual system has organized and selected elements in our environment to which attention should be allocated. Part of this process involves grouping perceptual features into a global whole. Individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) rely on a more local processing strategy, which may be driven by difficulties perceptually grouping stimuli. We tested this notion using a line discrimination task in which two horizontal lines were superimposed on a background of black and white dots organized so that, on occasion, the dots induced the Ponzo illusion if perceptually grouped together. Results showed that even though neither group was aware of the illusion, the ASD group was significantly less likely than typically developing group to make perceptual judgments influenced by the illusion, revealing difficulties in preattentive grouping of visual stimuli. This may explain why individuals with ASD rely on local processing strategies, and offers new insight into the mechanism driving perceptual grouping in the typically developing human brain.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207