How did we find out? So first we had to solve a hard problem: Imagery and Perception have totally different visual inputs, that obviously lead to differences in brain activity that will mask shared mechanisms. That is, we can't just compare them.
-
-
Prikaži ovu nit
-
So we used a trick that's worked before in perception: We varied how much people know about the objects they see or imagine. In perception that modulates early visual processing (P1 for EEG aficionados) and we checked whether that happens in imagery as well. It does!pic.twitter.com/JjUVaxkml2
Prikaži ovu nit -
Importantly, we made sure that people don't know beforehand what we'll ask them to do, so they don't prepare to imagine things and never showed them the whole thing we wanted them to potentially imagine. We even asked them to do something else in between to reset visual activity.pic.twitter.com/kAl3xRbg1U
Prikaži ovu nit -
Knowing more about those objects didn't only change brain activity, but also made successful imagery more likely and faster. But clearly, there must be differences, right? I mean, perception is clearly easier than imagery.pic.twitter.com/3mV8DZMCSr
Prikaži ovu nit -
Indeed, we found that the N1 component, associated with putting lower level features together as a meaningful configuration was delayed in imagery compared to perception and reduced when imagery failed. So building a stable representation seems to be what's hard in imagery.pic.twitter.com/SSi1Sx0Whb
Prikaži ovu nit -
@MLagaphe discusses many more things those findings tell us, but I particularly love his last sentence: Whether in seeing or imagining objects, our brains begin to construct what we “see” before the mind’s eye from basic visual features and with the help of what we know.Prikaži ovu nit
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.