Characterizing perceptual alternations during binocular rivalry in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The visual phenomenon of binocular rivalry has been thoroughly examined in adults, yet little is known about how characteristics of binocular rivalry may change from childhood to early adulthood. The current study used a child-friendly task, where pairs of orthogonal, oblique sine wave gratings were presented dichoptically to 7-, 9-, 11-year-olds and young adults. Stimuli size (diameter = 1.4 or 4.4) and contrast level (0.2 or 0.8), factors with well-known effects on rivalry in adults, varied across trials. On each trial, participants recorded their alternations between percepts on a handheld button box. The average duration and proportion of time participants reported viewing each type of percept (i.e., exclusive, mixed, and fading/other percepts) were analyzed. Children spent a significantly greater proportion of time viewing exclusive percepts and less time viewing mixed percepts compared to young adults, which provides evidence against the theory of increased mixed percepts in children (Kovacs & Eisenberg, 2005, Binocular Rivalry, pp. 101–116, Alais & Blake, Eds.). Sequential patterns of alternations between percepts also varied between children and young adults (e.g. “return transitions”). No significant differences were observed between age groups for average durations of exclusive percepts, contrary to previous reports suggesting faster alternation rates in children (Kovacs & Eisenberg, 2005; Hudak et al., 2011, Front. in Hum. Neurosci., 5, 1–7). No differences were observed between 7-, 9-, 11-year-olds for any dependent measure. These are the first reports of several characteristics of binocular rivalry in children, specifically measures of mixed percepts. Thus, providing a number of theoretical implications.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".