Probing the Imaginable: Shared and Distinct Processes Between Imagery and Perception Across Semantic Domains

Our ability to visualize things outside our field of view often feels similar to visual perception. However, while perception is grounded in real-world sensory inputs, imagery might rely on information stored in long-term memory. This contrast raises key questions about the nature of these processes: Do visual mental imagery and visual perception depend on distinct neural mechanisms? Or do they share access to a common representational space, which encodes semantic content in a way capable of supporting both internally generated images and externally driven perception? To what extent are individual differences in imagery vividness related to behavioral performance? To answer these questions, we developed a computerized battery eliciting visual perception and visual mental imagery across five semantic domains: Colors, Faces, Letters, Maps, and Shapes. Seventy-five typical imagers (based on their scores from the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire, VVIQ; 49 in-person, 26 online) completed this battery. On each trial, we recorded two imagery performance measures—accuracy and response times—and two subjective measures: vividness for the imagery and confidence for the perceptual trials. We found performance differences between imagery and perception in the domains of Color, Face, and Map, but not in the domains of Letters or Shapes, suggesting the existence of domain-specific processes that differentiate imagery from perception. Additionally, domain-specific performance was predicted by logistic regression models, further indicating that distinct mechanisms may support imagery and perception depending on the semantic content. Furthermore, unsupervised clustering analysis revealed a latent space of four clusters, fewer than the theoretically possible 10 clusters (2 modalities × 5 domains). This reduction suggests shared features across domains and modalities, pointing to a modality-independent semantic code, likely stored in higher-order cortical regions, that supports common high-level conceptual representations engaged by both imagery and perception. Trial-by-trial vividness ratings were stronger predictors of imagery task performance than the off-task VVIQ, indicating that in-the-moment vividness more accurately reflects individual imagery ability.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Imagination Cognition and Personality
Published
2025-10-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/02762366251382836
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Aesthetic Perception and Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.86
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Probing the Imaginable: Shared and Distinct Processes Between Imagery and Perception Across Semantic Domains

Paolo Bartolomeo, Jianghao Liu, K. Chang, Rachel M. Frank et al.
2 citations
Imagination Cognition and Personality
Aesthetic Perception and Analysis
2.86
article

Probing the Imaginable: Shared and Distinct Processes Between Imagery and Perception Across Semantic Domains

Paolo Bartolomeo, Jianghao Liu, K. Chang, Rachel M. Frank, Zhiyao Liu, Alfredo Spagna, Chloe Lambert, Tengyu Song, Kezia Chuaqui, Natalie Baer
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Our ability to visualize things outside our field of view often feels similar to visual perception. However, while perception is grounded in real-world sensory inputs, imagery might rely on information stored in long-term memory. This contrast raises key questions about the nature of these processes: Do visual mental imagery and visual perception depend on distinct neural mechanisms? Or do they share access to a common representational space, which encodes semantic content in a way capable of supporting both internally generated images and externally driven perception? To what extent are individual differences in imagery vividness related to behavioral performance? To answer these questions, we developed a computerized battery eliciting visual perception and visual mental imagery across five semantic domains: Colors, Faces, Letters, Maps, and Shapes. Seventy-five typical imagers (based on their scores from the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire, VVIQ; 49 in-person, 26 online) completed this battery. On each trial, we recorded two imagery performance measures—accuracy and response times—and two subjective measures: vividness for the imagery and confidence for the perceptual trials. We found performance differences between imagery and perception in the domains of Color, Face, and Map, but not in the domains of Letters or Shapes, suggesting the existence of domain-specific processes that differentiate imagery from perception. Additionally, domain-specific performance was predicted by logistic regression models, further indicating that distinct mechanisms may support imagery and perception depending on the semantic content. Furthermore, unsupervised clustering analysis revealed a latent space of four clusters, fewer than the theoretically possible 10 clusters (2 modalities × 5 domains). This reduction suggests shared features across domains and modalities, pointing to a modality-independent semantic code, likely stored in higher-order cortical regions, that supports common high-level conceptual representations engaged by both imagery and perception. Trial-by-trial vividness ratings were stronger predictors of imagery task performance than the off-task VVIQ, indicating that in-the-moment vividness more accurately reflects individual imagery ability.

Imagination Cognition and Personality
Allen Institute for Brain Science (US), Institut du Cerveau (FR), Dassault Systèmes (France) (FR), Columbia University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Aesthetic Perception and Analysis
2.86
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.