4.4 Review

Visuo-spatial imagery in dreams of congenitally and early blind: a systematic review

Journal

FRONTIERS IN INTEGRATIVE NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 17, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fnint.2023.1204129

Keywords

dreams; congenitally blind; cross-modal plasticity; metamodal brain; visuo-spatial imagery

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article systematically reviews the presence and nature of visual imagery in the dreams of congenitally blind people. Studies suggest that the blind occipital cortex may integrate non-visual sensory inputs and generate visuo-spatial impressions. Visual impressions have also been reported in near-death or out-of-body experiences of blind individuals. Understanding the mechanistic nature of these visual impressions could have potential implications for utilizing neuroplasticity in the treatment of neurodisability.
BackgroundThe presence of visual imagery in dreams of congenitally blind people has long been a matter of substantial controversy. We set to systematically review body of published work on the presence and nature of oneiric visuo-spatial impressions in congenitally and early blind subjects across different areas of research, from experimental psychology, functional neuroimaging, sensory substitution, and sleep research. MethodsRelevant studies were identified using the following databases: EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsychINFO. ResultsStudies using diverse imaging techniques and sensory substitution devices broadly suggest that the blind occipital cortex may be able to integrate non-visual sensory inputs, and thus possibly also generate visuo-spatial impressions. Visual impressions have also been reported by blind subjects who had near-death or out-of-body experiences. ConclusionDeciphering the mechanistic nature of these visual impression could open new possibility in utilization of neuroplasticity and its potential role for treatment of neurodisability.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available