2014
DOI: 10.1007/s11098-014-0392-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Perceptual content and the content of mental imagery

Abstract: The aim of this paper is to argue that the phenomenal similarity between perceiving and visualizing can be explained by the similarity between the structure of the content of these two different mental states. And this puts important constraints on how we should think about perceptual content and the content of mental imagery.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
50
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 98 publications
(57 citation statements)
references
References 81 publications
1
50
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Interestingly, and as we propose here, it may be the case that the focus of attention is a domain-general, shared resource that can either select internal or external information, depending on the specific task demands. In agreement with this modern notion, it has been previously found that the same representational space is used for internally and externally attended stimuli (Burgess et al, 2007;O'Craven, Downing, & Kanwisher, 1999;Nanay, 2015;Nobre, Coull, Maquet, and Frith, 2004). In addition, it has been argued that information in WM is at the interface between the external and internal environment, as certain WM tasks cause interference for both external and internal attention .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 58%
“…Interestingly, and as we propose here, it may be the case that the focus of attention is a domain-general, shared resource that can either select internal or external information, depending on the specific task demands. In agreement with this modern notion, it has been previously found that the same representational space is used for internally and externally attended stimuli (Burgess et al, 2007;O'Craven, Downing, & Kanwisher, 1999;Nanay, 2015;Nobre, Coull, Maquet, and Frith, 2004). In addition, it has been argued that information in WM is at the interface between the external and internal environment, as certain WM tasks cause interference for both external and internal attention .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 58%
“…Does it influence your imaginative episodes that you are holding a cup of hot coffee or a teddy bear or that you've just watched a boring documentary? The answer is that it definitely does: it has been known for a long time that imagination is extremely sensitive to all kinds of external and seemingly irrelevant influences (see the locus classicus , Feingold, ; and see also more specific findings about the influences on mental imagery: Segal, ; Segal and Nathan, ; Nanay, , ; Raftopoulos, Forthcoming).…”
Section: Conclusion: Imagination and The Empirical Findings About Decmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…And the way neuroscientists and psychologists talk about mental imagery has nothing to do with little pictures in the head. Neuroscience considers mental imagery to be perceptual processing that is not triggered by corresponding sensory stimulation in the relevant sense modality (Kosslyn et al 1995;Pearson et al 2015;Nanay 2015Nanay , 2018. Mental imagery in this sense is as scientifically and ontologically unproblematic as perception.…”
Section: Criterion Bmentioning
confidence: 99%