↓ Skip to main content

Subliminal Impending Collision Increases Perceived Object Size and Enhances Pupillary Light Reflex

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Subliminal Impending Collision Increases Perceived Object Size and Enhances Pupillary Light Reflex
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01897
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lihong Chen, Xiangyong Yuan, Qian Xu, Ying Wang, Yi Jiang

Abstract

Fast detection of ambient danger is crucial for the survival of biological entities. Previous studies have shown that threatening information can bias human visual perception and enhance physiological reactions. It remains to be delineated whether the modulation of threat on human perceptual and physiological responses can take place below awareness. To probe this issue, we adopted visual looming stimuli and created two levels of threat by varying their motion trajectories to the observers, such that the stimuli could move in a path that either collided with the observers' heads or just nearly missed. We found that when the observers could not explicitly discriminate any difference between the collision and the near-miss stimuli, the visual stimuli on the collision course appeared larger and evoked greater pupil constrictions than those on the near-miss course. Furthermore, the magnitude of size overestimation was comparable to when the impending collision was consciously perceived. Our findings suggest that threatening information can bias human visual perception and strengthen pupil constrictions independent of conscious representation of the threat, and imply the existence of the subcortical visual pathway dedicated to automatically processing threat-related signals in humans.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 21%
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Master 2 7%
Professor 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 9 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 11 38%
Neuroscience 4 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Engineering 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 11 38%
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 24 December 2016.
All research outputs
#20,370,282
of 22,919,505 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#24,273
of 30,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#349,958
of 415,783 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#354
of 418 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,919,505 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,068 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 415,783 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 418 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.