2018
DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/cf6z4
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pareidolia-proneness, reality discrimination errors, and visual hallucination-like experiences in a non-clinical sample

Abstract: Introduction: It has been proposed that hallucinations occur because of problems with reality discrimination (when internal, self-generated cognitions are misattributed to an external, non-self source) and because of elevated levels of top-down processing. In this study, we examined whether visual reality discrimination abilities and elevated top-down processing (assessed via face pareidolia-proneness) were associated with how often non-clinical participants report visual hallucination-like experiences. Method… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
5
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
3
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For face hallucinations (when internal, self-generated impressions are misattributed to external sources), appropriate visual input is not required. In line with this, in a nonclinical sample of young adults, levels of schizotypy do not correlate with face pareidolia 101 . Yet high positive schizotypy scores are associated with an increased tendency to perceive meaning in visual noise, i.e., with more liberal cognitive criteria to seeing faces 102 .…”
Section: Face Tuning In Schizophreniasupporting
confidence: 51%
“…For face hallucinations (when internal, self-generated impressions are misattributed to external sources), appropriate visual input is not required. In line with this, in a nonclinical sample of young adults, levels of schizotypy do not correlate with face pareidolia 101 . Yet high positive schizotypy scores are associated with an increased tendency to perceive meaning in visual noise, i.e., with more liberal cognitive criteria to seeing faces 102 .…”
Section: Face Tuning In Schizophreniasupporting
confidence: 51%
“…Our results complement findings of a previous study reporting that pareidolia proneness is related to hallucination tendency in healthy individuals (Smailes et al, 2020). In the current study, where we examined both, hallucination and delusion tendency, we could show that the association with delusions is stronger and may be the actual primary driver behind the association with hallucinations.…”
Section: What Drives Pareidolia Pronenesssupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Eighty two healthy adult volunteers participated in the experiment (mean age: 23.78, SD: 3.29, 55 female). The number of participants was determined using a priori power analysis for detecting a correlation at p < 0.05 with a power of 80% or more, and considering effects found in previous studies with a similar sample size (Smailes et al, 2020). All participants had normal or corrected-to-normal vision (−0.5 diopters or better) and no history of neurological impairments or psychiatric disorders.…”
Section: Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This might imply that intentional inhibition not only underlies auditory hallucinations, but also those in the visual modality. Further research is needed to explore links between inhibition and hallucinations in specific modalities (for an example of this approach, see Aynsworth et al., 2017 , Smailes et al., 2018 ); the data presented here are merely suggestive of inhibition as a process relevant to hallucinations across a range of modalities. The results for the temporal context confusion score (and its apparently stronger relation to hallucination-proneness than intrusive thoughts) also highlight the need for taking into account contextual factors on the ICIM: we recommend that future studies using the task deploy the TCC as their primary outcome for individual differences analysis of hallucinatory traits, which would also align with the more recent use of similar continuous recognition tasks (e.g., Wahlen, Nahum, Gabriel, & Schnider, 2011 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%