Back

Modelling perceptual uncertainty in a thermosensory illusion across the lifespan

Ehmsen, J. F.; Mitchell, A. G.; Kraenge, C. E.; Courtin, A. S.; Simonnet, C.; Fardo, F.

2025-07-16 neuroscience
10.1101/2025.07.10.664158 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Most studies of perceptual illusions rely on explicit reports alone, offering a limited view into the computations that underlie ambiguous sensory experiences. Here, we introduce a multivariate computational approach to model paradoxical heat sensation (PHS), a thermosensory illusion in which skin cooling evokes sensations of warmth, as an individual-specific process. We tested 75 healthy adults (aged 21-80) using a perceptual decision-making task with stimuli designed to elicit PHS. Binary perceptual choices, response times and confidence ratings were jointly analysed using hierarchical multivariate Bayesian modelling to characterise PHS at both the population and individual levels across the lifespan. We tested two distinct perceptual profiles: "true perceivers", who experience PHS similarly to a veridical warm percept; and "unsure perceivers", who perceive PHS as an ambiguous experience. At the group level, behaviour was best explained by the unsure perceiver model, suggesting that PHS is often an uncertain experience, rather than a categorical misperception. At the individual level, however, both profiles were represented, with considerable inter-individual variability in model fit. Older participants were more likely to report PHS and did so at lower levels of thermal contrast, but we observed no correlation between age and perceptual profile. This suggests that while ageing increases the likelihood of experiencing PHS, it does not alter the qualitative nature of its perception. These findings also show how multivariate modelling of perceptual, decisional and metacognitive responses can reveal distinct, subjective profiles and their variation across individuals and age.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Communications Psychology
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
15.0%
2
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 2%
12.6%
3
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 3%
9.7%
4
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 18%
9.6%
5
Pain
78 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.7%
50% of probability mass above
6
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 24%
5.1%
7
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 3%
4.8%
8
Nature Human Behaviour
95 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.3%
9
The Journal of Neuroscience
1025 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.8%
10
Cortex
119 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.4%
11
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 10%
2.1%
12
Journal of Neurophysiology
302 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
13
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 48%
1.7%
14
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
393 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
15
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 31%
1.4%
16
NeuroImage
903 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
17
Cerebral Cortex
396 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
18
Biological Psychology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.0%
19
PLOS Biology
486 papers in training set
Top 12%
0.8%
20
Psychophysiology
77 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
21
Neuroscience of Consciousness
16 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
22
The Journal of Pain
30 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%
23
eneuro
439 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.6%
24
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 33%
0.6%