↓ Skip to main content

Awareness of Central Luminance Edge is Crucial for the Craik-O’Brien-Cornsweet Effect

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Awareness of Central Luminance Edge is Crucial for the Craik-O’Brien-Cornsweet Effect
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2011
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2011.00125
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ayako Masuda, Junji Watanabe, Masahiko Terao, Masataka Watanabe, Akihiro Yagi, Kazushi Maruya

Abstract

The Craik-O'Brien-Cornsweet (COC) effect demonstrates that perceived lightness depends not only on the retinal input at corresponding visual areas but also on distal retinal inputs. In the COC effect, the central edge of an opposing pair of luminance gradients (COC edge) makes adjoining regions with identical luminance appear to be different. To investigate the underlying mechanisms of the effect, we examined whether the subjective awareness of the COC edge is necessary for the generation of the effect. We manipulated the visibility of the COC edge using visual backward masking and continuous flash suppression while monitoring subjective reports regarding online percepts and aftereffects of adaptation. Psychophysical results showed that the online percept of the COC effect nearly vanishes in conditions where the COC edge is rendered invisible. On the other hand, the results of adaptation experiments showed that the COC edge is still processed at the early stage even under the perceptual suppression. These results suggest that processing of the COC edge at the early stage is not sufficient for generating the COC effect, and that subjective awareness of the COC edge is necessary.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 4%
Unknown 26 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 26%
Student > Bachelor 4 15%
Professor 2 7%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 1 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 44%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 15%
Engineering 3 11%
Neuroscience 3 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 3 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 January 2012.
All research outputs
#18,313,878
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,040
of 7,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,968
of 180,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#91
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,114 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 180,328 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.