until recently, i had no idea that my (limited) level of mental visualization was other than "typical". i am an intensely visual learner, and an avid photographer - but the best i can visualize of an apple (say) is ghostlike. i am fascinated by this subject.
Not sure if it's because potential hyperphantasia or because as you said, your findings are based on behavioural experiments, but I have to say that the part "when we vividly imagine something, the brain may suppress or "dim" other unrelated visual signals." is completely bollocks.
Now, I also don't know if this supposed to mean that when we imagine things they are less detailed and hyperfocused than actually seeing things, or that when people try to imagine things whilst still having visual stimuli the former is "dimmed" in favour of the latter, but from my experience both statements would be false.
Good indicator is that recent survey you did when the sliders had to be moved so the picture got more detailed, and we were to set it to the level we imagined it. There my mind even built a "setting" for each picture, with details regarding things that weren't present on them, but were "behind" the PoV.
I think you misunderstood what Joel is saying: it is not the imagined that gives way in favor of the seen, it is that the brain dims the signals coming from the eye when we focus on visualizing something internally.
Taking your sentence "when people try to imagine things whilst still having visual stimuli the former is dimmed in favour of the latter", it is rather the latter that is dimmed in favor of the former.
I'm excited to learn about the recent findings on the fundamental mechanisms behind visual imagery. However, I came across some confusion while reading the paper linked in the blog post, specifically regarding the experimental design of Experiment 4 (adapters + imagery). The figure caption related to this experiment design refers to Fig. 1f, but there is no 'f' in Figure 1. Could you please update the figure or the caption to provide a clearer explanation of the experiment design?
You lost me at “Have you ever closed your eyes and imagined a vivid picture, let’s say a green apple?”
The answer is a clear “no.”
I couldn’t relate to the rest of what you wrote.
If both your wife and your kids are yelling at you to slow down, I’d suggest you listen and go slow. You can progress to increased speed over time, as you become more confident with the numerous things to which you must pay attention.
until recently, i had no idea that my (limited) level of mental visualization was other than "typical". i am an intensely visual learner, and an avid photographer - but the best i can visualize of an apple (say) is ghostlike. i am fascinated by this subject.
Not sure if it's because potential hyperphantasia or because as you said, your findings are based on behavioural experiments, but I have to say that the part "when we vividly imagine something, the brain may suppress or "dim" other unrelated visual signals." is completely bollocks.
Now, I also don't know if this supposed to mean that when we imagine things they are less detailed and hyperfocused than actually seeing things, or that when people try to imagine things whilst still having visual stimuli the former is "dimmed" in favour of the latter, but from my experience both statements would be false.
Good indicator is that recent survey you did when the sliders had to be moved so the picture got more detailed, and we were to set it to the level we imagined it. There my mind even built a "setting" for each picture, with details regarding things that weren't present on them, but were "behind" the PoV.
I think you misunderstood what Joel is saying: it is not the imagined that gives way in favor of the seen, it is that the brain dims the signals coming from the eye when we focus on visualizing something internally.
Taking your sentence "when people try to imagine things whilst still having visual stimuli the former is dimmed in favour of the latter", it is rather the latter that is dimmed in favor of the former.
I'm excited to learn about the recent findings on the fundamental mechanisms behind visual imagery. However, I came across some confusion while reading the paper linked in the blog post, specifically regarding the experimental design of Experiment 4 (adapters + imagery). The figure caption related to this experiment design refers to Fig. 1f, but there is no 'f' in Figure 1. Could you please update the figure or the caption to provide a clearer explanation of the experiment design?
My question for the research then would be: can we reverse the findings and show that aphants have a harder time focussing their awareness?
You lost me at “Have you ever closed your eyes and imagined a vivid picture, let’s say a green apple?”
The answer is a clear “no.”
I couldn’t relate to the rest of what you wrote.
If both your wife and your kids are yelling at you to slow down, I’d suggest you listen and go slow. You can progress to increased speed over time, as you become more confident with the numerous things to which you must pay attention.