Abstract
Pareidolias refer to visual perceptual deficits where ambiguous shapes take on meaningful appearances. In neurodegenerative diseases, pareidolias are examined via a paper-based neuropsychological tool called the noise pareidolia test. In this study, we present initial findings regarding the utilization of pareidolia test on a digital format to analyze variations between paper-based and digital testing approaches. We performed our experiments on healthy controls, patients diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease (AD), Dementia with Lewy body disease (DLB) and Parkinson’s disease (PD). Baseline MMSE assessments were conducted, followed by pareidolia testing using both paper-based tools and smartphones. Bland-Altman analysis was performed to evaluate the agreement between the two methods. We found that the illusionary phenomenon of pareidolia is consistent across paper and digital modalities of testing; that perceptual constancy is maintained across patient groups despite variations in image sizes; and pareidolic misperceptions, to some extent, are stabilized on a digital format. Our findings demonstrate a practical way of testing pareidolias on smartphones without compromising on the functionality of the test.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Yes
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Osaka University institution review board cleared the protocol for the study to be performed in the Department of Neurology and the Department of Psychiatry, Osaka University, Nippon Life Hospital and Asakayama General Hospital all located in Osaka, Japan in accordance with the ethical standards of the Declaration of Helsinki (IRB Approval number – 22307).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data cannot be shared publicly because of ethical restrictions. Data are available from the Osaka University Institutional Data Access / Ethics Committee (via email) for researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data.
