CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 82Visual perception and processing mechanismsFace Recognition and PerceptionReading and Literacy Development

Line segments are perceived better in a coherent context than alone: an object-line effect in visual perception

Open access
Williams, Amanda, Weisstein, Naomi·1978·Memory & Cognition
DOI 10.3758/bf03197432
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3758/bf03197432

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Object Superiority Effect is that we perceive and interpret whole objects faster and more effectively than the individual elements that make up these objects.

    “An example of our superior perceptual-motor abilities is the Object Superiority Effect: we perceive and interpret whole objects faster and more effective than the (more simple) individual elements that make up these objects (Weisstein and Harris, 1974; McClelland, 1978; Williams and Weisstein, 1978; Pomerantz, 1981).”

    From Human- versus Artificial Intelligence (2021) · cites this paper as Williams and Weisstein, 1978

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • Human- versus Artificial Intelligence

    Korteling, J. E. (., van de Boer-Visschedijk, G. C., Blankendaal, R. A. M., Boonekamp, R. C., & Eikelboom, A. R. (2021) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2021.622364 · Cited by 619 · see citing works

    “…perceptual-motor abilities is the Object Superiority Effect : we perceive and interpret whole objects faster and more effective than the (more simple) individual elements that make up these objects (Weisstein and Harris, 1974; McClelland, 1978; Williams and Weisstein, 1978; Pomerantz, 1981).”
    Background

Authors
Williams, A., & Weisstein, N.
Affiliations
University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US)
Venue
Memory & Cognition
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
1978-03
Volume
6
Issue
2
Pages
85-90
ISSN
  • 0090-502X (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5946
DOI
10.3758/bf03197432
OpenAlex
W2087707996
Cited by
82
References
2
Citations by year
2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2
FWCI
1.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Memory & Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
Keywords
visual perception, context effects, 3D drawing
MeSH terms
Field Dependence-Independence, Humans, Visual Perception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review