CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 8Visual perception and processing mechanismsPhilosophy and Theoretical ScienceTactile and Sensory Interactions

Imageless imagery in aphantasia: decoding non-sensory imagery in aphantasia

Open access
Meng, Ming, Chang, Shuai, Zhang, Xinyu, Pearson, Joel·2023·Research Square
DOI 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3162223/v1
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Activity in early visual cortex is thought to tightly couple with conscious experience, including feedback-driven mental imagery. However, the state of mental imagery, what takes its place or how any activity relates to qualia in those with aphantasia (a complete lack of visual imagery) remains unknown. In the current study, univariate (amplitude) and multivariate (decoding) BOLD signals during imagery attempts were recorded in primary visual cortex. Unlike in those with imagery, neural signatures in those with validated aphantasia were ipsilateral and could not be cross-decoded with perceptual representations. Further, perception-induced neural activation was weaker in those with aphantasia compared to controls. Together, these data suggest that an imagery-related representation, but with less or transformed sensory information, exists in the primary visual cortex of those with aphantasia. Our data challenges the classic view that activity in primary visual cortex should result in sensory qualia.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3162223/v1

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Low-level imagery representations found in people with aphantasia may be atypical.

    “one raises the plausible possibility that the low-level imagery representations found in people with aphantasia, although detectable, may be atypical [91”

    From Aphantasia and hyperphantasia: exploring imagery vividness extremes (2024) · cites this paper as [91]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. Tong, F. (2003). Primary visual cortex and visual awareness. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 4, 219-229. 10.1038/nrn1055. · DOI
  2. Meng, M., Remus, D.A., and Tong, F. (2005). Filling-in of visual phantoms in the human brain. Nat. Neurosci. 8, 1248-1254. 10.1038/nn1518. · DOI
  3. Pearson, J., and Westbrook, F. (2015). Phantom perception: voluntary and involuntary nonretinal vision. Trends Cogn. Sci. 19, 278-284. 10.1016/j.tics.2015.03.004. · DOI · Paper page
  4. Chang, S., and Pearson, J. (2020). The functional effects of voluntary and involuntary phantom color on conscious awareness. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 149, 1006-1016. 10.1037/xge0000684. · DOI
  5. Albers, A.M., Kok, P., Toni, I., Dijkerman, H.C., and de Lange, F.P. (2013). Shared Representations for Working Memory and Mental Imagery in Early Visual Cortex. Curr. Biol. 23, 1427-1431. 10.1016/j.cub.2013.05.065. · DOI · Paper page
  6. Koenig-Robert, R., and Pearson, J. (2019). Decoding the contents and strength of imagery before volitional engagement. Sci. Rep. 9, 3504. 10.1038/s41598-019-39813-y. · DOI
  7. Naselaris, T., Olman, C.A., Stansbury, D.E., Ugurbil, K., and Gallant, J.L. (2015). A voxel-wise encoding model for early visual areas decodes mental images of remembered scenes. NeuroImage 105, 215-228. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.10.018. · DOI
  8. Pearson, J., Naselaris, T., Holmes, E.A., and Kosslyn, S.M. (2015). Mental Imagery: Functional Mechanisms and Clinical Applications. Trends Cogn. Sci. 19, 590-602. 10.1016/j.tics.2015.08.003. · DOI · Paper page
  9. Zeman, A., Dewar, M., and Della Sala, S. (2015). Lives without imagery -Congenital aphantasia. Cortex 73, 378-380. 10.1016/j.cortex.2015.05.019. · DOI · Paper page
  10. Wicken, M., Keogh, R., and Pearson, J. (2021). The critical role of mental imagery in human emotion: insights from fear-based imagery and aphantasia. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 288, 20210267. 10.1098/rspb.2021.0267. · DOI · Paper page
  11. Kay, L., Keogh, R., Andrillon, T., and Pearson, J. (2022). The pupillary light response as a physiological index of aphantasia, sensory and phenomenological imagery strength. eLife 11, e72484. 10.7554/eLife.72484. · DOI · Paper page
  12. Pearson, J. (2014). New Directions in Mental-Imagery Research: The Binocular-Rivalry Technique and Decoding fMRI Patterns. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 23, 178-183. 10.1177/0963721414532287. · DOI
  13. Pearson, J., and Kosslyn, S.M. (2015). The heterogeneity of mental representation: Ending the imagery debate. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 112, 10089-10092. 10.1073/pnas.1504933112. · DOI
  14. Cichy, R.M., Heinzle, J., and Haynes, J.-D. (2012). Imagery and Perception Share Cortical Representations of Content and Location. Cereb. Cortex 22, 372-380. 10.1093/cercor/bhr106. · DOI · Paper page
  15. Lee, S.-H., Kravitz, D.J., and Baker, C.I. (2012). Disentangling visual imagery and perception of real-world objects. NeuroImage 59, 4064-4073. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.10.055. · DOI · Paper page
  16. Dijkstra, N., and Fleming, S.M. (2023). Subjective signal strength distinguishes reality from imagination. Nat. Commun. 14, 1627. 10.1038/s41467-023-37322-1. · DOI · Paper page
  17. Vetter, P., Bola, Ł., Reich, L., Bennett, M., Muckli, L., and Amedi, A. (2020). Decoding Natural Sounds in Early "Visual" Cortex of Congenitally Blind Individuals. Curr. Biol. 30, 3039-3044.e2. 10.1016/j.cub.2020.05.071. · DOI
  18. Petro, L.S., Paton, A.T., and Muckli, L. (2017). Contextual modulation of primary visual cortex by auditory signals. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 372, 20160104. 10.1098/rstb.2016.0104. · DOI
  19. Keogh, R., Wicken, M., and Pearson, J. (2021). Visual working memory in aphantasia: Retained accuracy and capacity with a different strategy. Cortex 143, 237-253. 10.1016/j.cortex.2021.07.012. · DOI · Paper page
  20. Burton, H., Diamond, J.B., and McDermott, K.B. (2003). Dissociating Cortical Regions Activated by Semantic and Phonological Tasks: A fMRI Study in Blind and Sighted People. J. Neurophysiol. 90, 1965-1982. 10.1152/jn.00279.2003. · DOI
  21. Watkins, S., Shams, L., Tanaka, S., Haynes, J.-D., and Rees, G. (2006). Sound alters activity in human V1 in association with illusory visual perception. NeuroImage 31, 1247-1256. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.016. · DOI
  22. Marks, D.F. (1973). Visual Imagery Differences in the Recall of Pictures. Br. J. Psychol. 64, 17-24. 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1973.tb01322.x. · DOI · Paper page
  23. Chang, S., Lewis, D.E., and Pearson, J. (2013). The functional effects of color perception and color imagery. J. Vis. 13. 10.1167/13.10.4. · DOI
  24. Chang, S., and Pearson, J. (2018). The functional effects of prior motion imagery and motion perception. Cortex 105, 83-96. 10.1016/j.cortex.2017.08.036. · DOI
  25. Fischl, B., Sereno, M.I., and Dale, A.M. (1999). Cortical Surface-Based Analysis: II: Inflation, Flattening, and a Surface-Based Coordinate System. NeuroImage 9, 195-207. 10.1006/nimg.1998.0396. · DOI · Paper page
  26. Cox, R.W. (1996). AFNI: Software for Analysis and Visualization of Functional Magnetic Resonance Neuroimages. Comput. Biomed. Res. 29, 162-173. 10.1006/cbmr.1996.0014. · DOI · Paper page
  27. Saad, Z.S., and Reynolds, R.C. (2012). SUMA. NeuroImage 62, 768-773. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.09.016. · DOI
  28. Saad, Z.S., Reynolds, R.C., Argall, B., Japee, S., and Cox, R.W. (2004). SUMA: An interface for surface-based intra-and inter-subject analysis with AFNI. In 2004 2nd IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: Macro to Nano (IEEE Cat No. 04EX821) (IEEE), pp. 1510-1513. 10.1109/ISBI.2004.1398837. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Meng, M., Chang, S., Zhang, X., & Pearson, J.
Affiliations
  • South China Normal University (CN)
  • Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Meng, Ming
ORCID
Venue
Research Square
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2023-08-01
DOI
10.21203/rs.3.rs-3162223/v1
OpenAlex
W4385408188
Cited by
8
References
4
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (31871136)
  • Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (2023A1515012596)
  • Chinesisch-Deutsche Zentrum für Wissenschaftsförderung (M-0705)
  • Australian Research Council (FT220100388, DP220100183)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
Keywords
aphantasia, mental imagery, primary visual cortex, neural decoding, qualia, ipsilateral activation, visual imagery

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