Inspecting visual mental images: Can people “see” implicit properties as easily in imagery and perception?

Can people “see” previously unnoticed properties in objects that they visualize, or are they locked into the organization of the pattern that was encoded during perception? To answer this question, we first asked a group to describe letters of the alphabet and found that some properties (such as the presence of a diagonal line) are often mentioned, whereas others (such as symmetry) are rarely if ever mentioned. Then we showed not only that other participants could correctly detect both kinds of properties in visualized letters, but also that the relative differences in the ease of detecting these two types of properties are highly similar in perception (when the letters are actually visible) and imagery (when the letters are merely visualized). These findings provide support for the view that images can be reinterpreted in ways much like what occurs during perception and speak to the wider issue of the long-standing debate about the format of mental images.

[1]  Stephen M. Kosslyn,et al.  Mental imagery: against the nihilistic hypothesis , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[2]  Georges Rey,et al.  Language of Thought , 2006 .

[3]  Daniel Reisberg,et al.  What an image depicts depends on what an image means , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[4]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  When is early visual cortex activated during visual mental imagery? , 2003, Psychological bulletin.

[5]  M. Peterson,et al.  Mental images can be ambiguous: Reconstruals and reference-frame reversals , 1992, Memory & cognition.

[6]  Stephen Michael Kosslyn,et al.  Information representation in visual images , 1975, Cognitive Psychology.

[7]  R. Kimchi Primacy of wholistic processing and global/local paradigm: a critical review. , 1992, Psychological bulletin.

[8]  D. Chambers,et al.  Neither pictures nor propositions: what can we learn from a mental image? , 1991, Canadian journal of psychology.

[9]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Mental imagery doesn't work like that , 2002, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[10]  G. Bower,et al.  Human Associative Memory , 1973 .

[11]  D. Reisberg Constraints on image-based discovery: a comment on Rouw et al. (1997) , 1998, Cognition.

[12]  Refractor Vision , 2000, The Lancet.

[13]  S. Kosslyn Image and Brain: The Resolution of the Imagery Debate , 1994, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[14]  Z. Pylyshyn Seeing and Visualizing: It's Not What You Think , 2003 .

[15]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  The case for mental imagery , 2006 .

[16]  Ronald A. Finke,et al.  Creative Imagery: Discoveries and inventions in Visualization , 1990 .

[17]  Romke Rouw,et al.  Detecting high-level and low-level properties in visual images and visual percepts , 1997, Cognition.

[18]  Zenon W. Pylyshyn,et al.  What the Mind’s Eye Tells the Mind’s Brain: A Critique of Mental Imagery , 1973 .

[19]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Visual mental images can be ambiguous: insights from individual differences in spatial transformation abilities , 2002, Cognition.

[20]  Z. Pylyshyn The imagery debate: Analogue media versus tacit knowledge. , 1981 .

[21]  S. Kosslyn Image and mind , 1982 .

[22]  Z. Pylyshyn Mental imagery: In search of a theory , 2002, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[23]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Imagery, propositions, and the form of internal representations , 1977, Cognitive Psychology.