MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386258837 · doi:10.1167/jov.23.9.4849

Reduced perception-action dissociation in children with amblyopia

2023· article· en· W4386258837 on OpenAlexaff
Zoha Ahmad, Krista R. Kelly, Erez Freud

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIllusionPerceptionPsychologyCognitive psychologyDissociation (chemistry)MonocularAction (physics)Optical illusionAudiologyCommunicationComputer visionComputer scienceMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Visual illusions differentially affect perception and action, providing insights into the functional dissociation between vision for perception and vision for action. One such illusion is the Ponzo illusion where perceptual behaviors are modulated by the monocular depth cues, while grasping trajectories resist the effect of the illusion. Children with amblyopia (poor vision in one eye) provide the opportunity to examine an outstanding question - to what extent normal visual experience is critical for the development of the perception-action functional dissociation. Here, we examined the effect of the Ponzo illusion on perception and action in a group of children with amblyopia (n=20, 9.1±2.2 years old) compared to typically developed children (n=20, 9.2±2.1 years old). In the incongruent trials, two objects that differ in their real size (40 & 42 mm) were placed on an illusory Ponzo background to create a conflict between the real and the perceived size of the object and vice versa in the congruent trials. Control and amblyopic participants were asked to grasp (action task) and manually estimate the length of the object (perceptual task). Across conditions, we recorded hand kinematics using the Optitrack motion capture system. Both groups showed equal effect of the illusion in the perceptual task, such that the object placed on the far surface was perceived as longer compared to when placed on the near surface. In contrast, a clear differentiation between the groups was observed for the grasping task. While amblyopic participants’ Maximum Grip Apertures (MGAs) were modulated by the illusion, the MGAs of typically developed children evaded the illusion and were scaled to the real size of the object regardless of the object’s placement on the background. Taken together, our results provide novel evidence that atypical visual experience in childhood from amblyopia impacts the development of the dissociation between perception and action.

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 communication0.0010.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207