Expanding the discussion: Revision of the fundamental assumptions framing the study of the neural correlates of consciousness.

The way researchers ask questions about consciousness is shaped by hidden assumptions that constrain possible answers. This paper identifies and tests the assumptions underlying contemporary debates about the neural correlates of consciousness, tracing them to Crick and Koch's 1990 framing. These premises create a sequential, passive view of conscious perception as the product of resolved unconscious processing at a single moment in time. Major debates—about the moment of entry, all-or-none versus graded nature, and report versus no-report paradigms—are driven by consensus on these assumptions. Removing these assumptions resolves some debates and suggests a dynamic, dispersed conception of consciousness, offering a more parsimonious account of conscious perception.

Study at a glance

Abstract

The way one asks a question is shaped by a-priori assumptions and constrains the range of possible answers. We identify and test the assumptions underlying contemporary debates, models, and methodology in the study of the neural correlates of consciousness, which was framed by Crick and Koch's seminal paper (1990). These premises create a sequential and passive conception of conscious perception: it is considered the product of resolved information processing by unconscious mechanisms, produced by a singular event in time and place representing the moment of entry. The conscious percept produced is then automatically retained to be utilized by post-conscious mechanisms. Major debates in the field, such as concern the moment of entry, the all-or-none vs graded nature, and report vs no-report paradigms, are driven by the consensus on these assumptions. We show how removing these assumptions can resolve some of the debates and challenges and prompt additional questions. The potential non-sequential nature of perception suggests new ways of thinking about consciousness as a dynamic and dispersed process, and in turn about the relationship between conscious and unconscious perception. Moreover, it allows us to present a parsimonious account for conscious perception while addressing more aspects of the phenomenon.