Nadine Dijkstra
@nadinedijkstra.bsky.social
PI of the https://imaginerealitylab.org/ @uclbrainscience.bsky.social where we investigate the neural and computational mechanisms of mental imagery and reality monitoring. Activist about mental health and EDI in academia. She/her.
Finally, on Friday at 10:45, we have Imagine Reality Lab affiliate @dotproduct.bsky.social presenting:
P6.36 | Pre-stimulus Shape Predictions Fluctuate At Alpha Rhythms And Bias Subsequent Perception.
Showing how content-specific pre-stimulus alpha-band oscillations influence perception.
P6.36 | Pre-stimulus Shape Predictions Fluctuate At Alpha Rhythms And Bias Subsequent Perception.
Showing how content-specific pre-stimulus alpha-band oscillations influence perception.
September 11, 2025 at 3:52 PM
Finally, on Friday at 10:45, we have Imagine Reality Lab affiliate @dotproduct.bsky.social presenting:
P6.36 | Pre-stimulus Shape Predictions Fluctuate At Alpha Rhythms And Bias Subsequent Perception.
Showing how content-specific pre-stimulus alpha-band oscillations influence perception.
P6.36 | Pre-stimulus Shape Predictions Fluctuate At Alpha Rhythms And Bias Subsequent Perception.
Showing how content-specific pre-stimulus alpha-band oscillations influence perception.
On Wednesday at 16:30, I will be presenting at a symposium organised by @redmondoconnell.bsky.social SY24: Integrating Distinct Viewpoints On The Neural Origins Of Metacognition.
I will show a series of experiments on higher-order monitoring for distinguishing imagination and perception.
I will show a series of experiments on higher-order monitoring for distinguishing imagination and perception.
September 11, 2025 at 3:49 PM
On Wednesday at 16:30, I will be presenting at a symposium organised by @redmondoconnell.bsky.social SY24: Integrating Distinct Viewpoints On The Neural Origins Of Metacognition.
I will show a series of experiments on higher-order monitoring for distinguishing imagination and perception.
I will show a series of experiments on higher-order monitoring for distinguishing imagination and perception.
On Wednesday at 10:45 @pazbartal.bsky.social will present:
P3.48 | The Influence Of Scene Context On Perceptual Reality Monitoring
Presenting preliminary results that suggest that imagery is more vivid and more likely to be confused for perception within congruent scene contexts.
P3.48 | The Influence Of Scene Context On Perceptual Reality Monitoring
Presenting preliminary results that suggest that imagery is more vivid and more likely to be confused for perception within congruent scene contexts.
September 11, 2025 at 3:45 PM
On Wednesday at 10:45 @pazbartal.bsky.social will present:
P3.48 | The Influence Of Scene Context On Perceptual Reality Monitoring
Presenting preliminary results that suggest that imagery is more vivid and more likely to be confused for perception within congruent scene contexts.
P3.48 | The Influence Of Scene Context On Perceptual Reality Monitoring
Presenting preliminary results that suggest that imagery is more vivid and more likely to be confused for perception within congruent scene contexts.
Looking forward to #ICON2025 next week! We will have several presentations on mental imagery, reality monitoring and expectations:
To kick us off, on Tuesday at 15:30, Martha Cottam will present:
P2.12 | Presence Expectations Modulate the Neural Signatures of Content Prediction Errors
To kick us off, on Tuesday at 15:30, Martha Cottam will present:
P2.12 | Presence Expectations Modulate the Neural Signatures of Content Prediction Errors
September 11, 2025 at 3:28 PM
Looking forward to #ICON2025 next week! We will have several presentations on mental imagery, reality monitoring and expectations:
To kick us off, on Tuesday at 15:30, Martha Cottam will present:
P2.12 | Presence Expectations Modulate the Neural Signatures of Content Prediction Errors
To kick us off, on Tuesday at 15:30, Martha Cottam will present:
P2.12 | Presence Expectations Modulate the Neural Signatures of Content Prediction Errors
We provide a novel perspective on reality monitoring errors such as hallucinations. Rather than being caused by erroneous precision weighting, we suggest they might be caused by erroneous precision monitoring
July 23, 2025 at 2:22 PM
We provide a novel perspective on reality monitoring errors such as hallucinations. Rather than being caused by erroneous precision weighting, we suggest they might be caused by erroneous precision monitoring
We use our model to replicate several key empirical findings, such as blindsight in normal observers observed by @hakwan.bsky.social et al, the absence of performance differences in aphantasia by @jianghaoliu.bsky.social and the priming effect of imagery on binocular rivalry by Pearson et al.
July 23, 2025 at 2:22 PM
We use our model to replicate several key empirical findings, such as blindsight in normal observers observed by @hakwan.bsky.social et al, the absence of performance differences in aphantasia by @jianghaoliu.bsky.social and the priming effect of imagery on binocular rivalry by Pearson et al.
Our model allows us to draw deep and novel links between perception, expectations and mental imagery, which we outline in more detail in the paper. For example, we propose that the difference between imagining and expecting is found in higher-order inferences
July 23, 2025 at 2:21 PM
Our model allows us to draw deep and novel links between perception, expectations and mental imagery, which we outline in more detail in the paper. For example, we propose that the difference between imagining and expecting is found in higher-order inferences
In our model, signal strength determines the experienced intensity of perceptual content (referred to as mental strength), irrespective of whether that content is perceived or imagined. In contrast, signal precision determines whether that content is in turn inferred to be real
July 23, 2025 at 2:19 PM
In our model, signal strength determines the experienced intensity of perceptual content (referred to as mental strength), irrespective of whether that content is perceived or imagined. In contrast, signal precision determines whether that content is in turn inferred to be real
We provide a novel perspective on reality monitoring errors such as hallucinations. Rather than being caused by erroneous precision weighting, we suggest they could be caused by erroneous precision monitoring
July 23, 2025 at 1:56 PM
We provide a novel perspective on reality monitoring errors such as hallucinations. Rather than being caused by erroneous precision weighting, we suggest they could be caused by erroneous precision monitoring
We use our model to replicate key empirical findings, e.g. blindsight in normal observers observed by @hakwan.bsky.social et al, the absence of performance differences in aphantasia by @jianghaoliu.bsky.social et al, and the priming effect of imagery on binocular rivalry observed by Pearson et al.
July 23, 2025 at 1:55 PM
We use our model to replicate key empirical findings, e.g. blindsight in normal observers observed by @hakwan.bsky.social et al, the absence of performance differences in aphantasia by @jianghaoliu.bsky.social et al, and the priming effect of imagery on binocular rivalry observed by Pearson et al.
Our model allows us to draw deep and novel links between perception, expectations and mental imagery, which we outline in more detail in the paper. For example, we propose that the difference between imagining and expecting is found in higher-order inferences
July 23, 2025 at 1:52 PM
Our model allows us to draw deep and novel links between perception, expectations and mental imagery, which we outline in more detail in the paper. For example, we propose that the difference between imagining and expecting is found in higher-order inferences
In our model, signal strength determines the experienced intensity of perceptual content (referred to as mental strength), irrespective of whether that content is perceived or imagined. In contrast, signal precision determines whether that content is in turn inferred to be real
July 23, 2025 at 1:51 PM
In our model, signal strength determines the experienced intensity of perceptual content (referred to as mental strength), irrespective of whether that content is perceived or imagined. In contrast, signal precision determines whether that content is in turn inferred to be real
First dinner with the new lab! 🤩🧠 With @giuliacabbai.bsky.social, @pazbartal.bsky.social, @steveallsopp.bsky.social, Bohdana Neurathova, Rico Stecher and Luna Huestegge.
February 19, 2025 at 12:48 PM
First dinner with the new lab! 🤩🧠 With @giuliacabbai.bsky.social, @pazbartal.bsky.social, @steveallsopp.bsky.social, Bohdana Neurathova, Rico Stecher and Luna Huestegge.
Amazing goodbye present from the Metalab ♥️ New merchandise for the Imagine Reality Lab? 🤩
December 18, 2024 at 4:30 PM
Amazing goodbye present from the Metalab ♥️ New merchandise for the Imagine Reality Lab? 🤩
If any of these regions are involved in transforming continuous signals in FG into a reality judgement, we would expect functional coupling between them in all conditions. We found that this was indeed the case for the anterior insula 12/N
November 15, 2024 at 8:14 AM
If any of these regions are involved in transforming continuous signals in FG into a reality judgement, we would expect functional coupling between them in all conditions. We found that this was indeed the case for the anterior insula 12/N
Finally, we looked for regions that encoded binary judgements of reality over and above a continuous reality signal and found a set of prefrontal and sub-cortical regions: the anterior insula, caudate nucleus and pre-SMA 11/N
November 15, 2024 at 8:13 AM
Finally, we looked for regions that encoded binary judgements of reality over and above a continuous reality signal and found a set of prefrontal and sub-cortical regions: the anterior insula, caudate nucleus and pre-SMA 11/N
Given that our stimuli were gratings, it is surprising we found the reality signal in FG. Interestingly, we did find significant interactions between imagery and perception in EVC, but activity in this region was not related to reality judgements 9/N
November 15, 2024 at 8:12 AM
Given that our stimuli were gratings, it is surprising we found the reality signal in FG. Interestingly, we did find significant interactions between imagery and perception in EVC, but activity in this region was not related to reality judgements 9/N
In line with its importance in reality monitoring, activity in FG predicts confusions between imagery and perception on a trial-by-trial basis. This effect is stronger in participants who also show strong confusion behaviourally 7/N
November 15, 2024 at 8:11 AM
In line with its importance in reality monitoring, activity in FG predicts confusions between imagery and perception on a trial-by-trial basis. This effect is stronger in participants who also show strong confusion behaviourally 7/N
By extracting the simulated latent reality signal from the model, we then go on to show that the same pattern of activity predicted by the model is reflected in the activity of bilateral fusiform gyrus 6/N
November 15, 2024 at 8:11 AM
By extracting the simulated latent reality signal from the model, we then go on to show that the same pattern of activity predicted by the model is reflected in the activity of bilateral fusiform gyrus 6/N
In line with our model, we first reveal striking similarity in the neural networks underlying imagery vividness and reality judgements, with significant modulation by both in bilateral fusiform gyrus, intraparietal sulcus, precentral sulcus and insula 5/N
November 15, 2024 at 8:10 AM
In line with our model, we first reveal striking similarity in the neural networks underlying imagery vividness and reality judgements, with significant modulation by both in bilateral fusiform gyrus, intraparietal sulcus, precentral sulcus and insula 5/N
Here, we investigated how the brain determines whether perceptual activity reflects reality or imagination by combining a psychophysical paradigm that generates confusions between imagery and perception with fMRI and computational modelling 2/N
November 15, 2024 at 8:08 AM
Here, we investigated how the brain determines whether perceptual activity reflects reality or imagination by combining a psychophysical paradigm that generates confusions between imagery and perception with fMRI and computational modelling 2/N
Over two experiments, our results were (mostly) in line with no insight: metacognitive criteria moved in tandem with decision criteria and presence responses were generally associated with high confidence during imagery 8/10
May 31, 2024 at 8:39 AM
Over two experiments, our results were (mostly) in line with no insight: metacognitive criteria moved in tandem with decision criteria and presence responses were generally associated with high confidence during imagery 8/10
In the case of no insight during imagery, confidence criteria should move in tandem with decision criteria, leading to confident presence responses. In contrast, insight should lead to independent confidence criteria setting, leading to low confidence in presence responses: 7/10
May 31, 2024 at 8:38 AM
In the case of no insight during imagery, confidence criteria should move in tandem with decision criteria, leading to confident presence responses. In contrast, insight should lead to independent confidence criteria setting, leading to low confidence in presence responses: 7/10
Compared to no imagery or incongruent imagery, congruent imagery consistently leads to an increase in presence responses, even in absent trials, suggesting participants sometimes confused imagery for perception. This effect is captured by a decrease in criterion/offset: 3/10
May 31, 2024 at 8:36 AM
Compared to no imagery or incongruent imagery, congruent imagery consistently leads to an increase in presence responses, even in absent trials, suggesting participants sometimes confused imagery for perception. This effect is captured by a decrease in criterion/offset: 3/10
In recent years, we have developed a psychophysical paradigm to experimentally investigate confusions between imagination and perception in healthy participants. In our paradigm, participants simultaneously imagine and detect simple gratings 2/10
May 31, 2024 at 8:36 AM
In recent years, we have developed a psychophysical paradigm to experimentally investigate confusions between imagination and perception in healthy participants. In our paradigm, participants simultaneously imagine and detect simple gratings 2/10