Imagery modulates the pupillary response, but this does not reliably index differences in imagery vividness

Most people report that they can imagine seeing things in their mind's eye. But there are large individual differences. A small proportion of people report that they can never visualise (aphantasics), and a similarly small proportion of people report that their imagined experiences are as realistic as seeing (hyperphantasics). The majority of people describe their visualisations as being moderately vivid. The ratings that inform imagery vividness analyses are subjective self-reports, but it has been suggested that imagery modulations of the pupillary response could be used as a physiological index of individual differences in imagery vividness. When we assessed this inter-relationship, we found that imagery can indeed modulate the pupillary response, with pupils becoming relatively more dilated if people imagine seeing dark, as opposed to bright scenes. However, imagery modulation of the pupillary response was not associated with individual differences in imagery vividness ratings. Overall, our data suggest that while imagery can modulate the pupillary response, this effect does not provide a reliable index of individual differences in imagery vividness ratings.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cortex
Published
2026-01-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2025.11.018
Primary Topic
Face Recognition and Perception
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Imagery modulates the pupillary response, but this does not reliably index differences in imagery vividness

Blake W. Saurels, Daniel Gardner, Derek Henry Arnold
Cortex
Face Recognition and Perception
article

Imagery modulates the pupillary response, but this does not reliably index differences in imagery vividness

Blake W. Saurels, Daniel Gardner, Derek Henry Arnold
article en

Abstract

Most people report that they can imagine seeing things in their mind's eye. But there are large individual differences. A small proportion of people report that they can never visualise (aphantasics), and a similarly small proportion of people report that their imagined experiences are as realistic as seeing (hyperphantasics). The majority of people describe their visualisations as being moderately vivid. The ratings that inform imagery vividness analyses are subjective self-reports, but it has been suggested that imagery modulations of the pupillary response could be used as a physiological index of individual differences in imagery vividness. When we assessed this inter-relationship, we found that imagery can indeed modulate the pupillary response, with pupils becoming relatively more dilated if people imagine seeing dark, as opposed to bright scenes. However, imagery modulation of the pupillary response was not associated with individual differences in imagery vividness ratings. Overall, our data suggest that while imagery can modulate the pupillary response, this effect does not provide a reliable index of individual differences in imagery vividness ratings.

CortexVol. 196
The University of Queensland (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 74%
Face Recognition and Perception
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.