# From dots to faces: Individual differences in visual imagery capacity predict the content of Ganzflicker-induced hallucinations

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.09011 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.09011/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 4 of its 97 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 11 Jul 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.10084/) (2019)
- [UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection for Dimension Reduction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.03426/) (2018)
- [BERTopic: Neural topic modeling with a class-based TF-IDF procedure](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.05794/) (2022)
- [Mapping of Subjective Accounts into Interpreted Clusters (MOSAIC): Topic Modelling and LLM applied to Stroboscopic Phenomenology](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.18318/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Perceptual Reality Transformer: What Must an Illustration Preserve?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.09852/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

A rapidly alternating red and black display known as Ganzflicker induces visual hallucinations that reflect the generative capacity of the visual system. Individuals vary in their degree of visual imagery, ranging from absent to vivid imagery. Recent proposals suggest that differences in the visual system along this imagery spectrum should also influence the complexity of other internally generated visual experiences. Here, we used tools from natural language processing to analyze free-text descriptions of hallucinations from over 4,000 participants, asking whether people with different imagery phenotypes see different things in their mind's eye during Ganzflicker-induced hallucinations. Topic modeling of descriptions revealed that strong imagers described complex, naturalistic content, while weak imagers reported simple geometric patterns. Using crowd-sourced sensorimotor norms, we also found that participants with stronger imagery used language with richer perceptual associations. These findings may reflect individual variation in coordination between early visual areas and higher-order regions relevant for the imagery spectrum.