ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2025
Shared and Diverging Neural Dynamics Underlying False and Veridical Perception.
Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contents of Visual Predictions Oscillate at Alpha Frequencies.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Shared and Diverging Neural Dynamics Underlying False and Veridical Perception.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We often mistake visual noise for meaningful images, which sometimes appear as convincing as veridical percepts. This suggests considerable overlap between the mechanisms that underlie false and veridical perception. Yet, false percepts must arise at least in part from internally generated signals. Here, we apply multivariate analyses to human MEG data to study the overlap between veridical and false perception across two aspects of perceptual inference: discrimination of content (what did I see?) and detection (did I see something?). Male and female participants performed a visual discrimination task requiring them to indicate the orientation of a noisy grating, as well as their confidence in having seen a grating. Importantly, on 50% of trials, only a noise patch was presented. To exclude external signals driving false percepts, noise patches were carefully designed not to contain orientation signal. Still, participants occasionally confidently reported seeing a grating on noise only trials, i.e., false percepts. Decoding analyses revealed a sensory signal reflecting the content of these false percepts, despite no such grating being physically presented. Uniquely, high confidence false, but not veridical, percepts were associated with increased prestimulus high alpha/low beta [11-14 Hz] power, potentially reflecting enhanced reliance on top-down signaling on false percept trials. Later on, a shared neural code reflecting confidence in stimulus presence emerged for both false and veridical percepts. These findings suggest that false percepts arise through neural signals reflecting both sensory content and detection, similar to veridical percepts, with an increase in prestimulus alpha/beta power uniquely contributing to false percepts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.