Discover the World of Aphantasia

Can You Picture This?

Imagine a world where up to 4% of people can't create mental images. That's the reality of aphantasia, a fascinating variation in human cognition discovered in 2015. Aphantasia Network is your hub for understanding, exploring, and embracing life without a mind's eye.

Joining Aphantasia Network has changed my life! I really thought aphantasia was holding me back, but now I understand that image-free thinking is my superpower.

side profile of a women, thinking deeply and visualizing. Imagined with midjourney.

Latest Aphantasia Activity

Research
Diverse Minds: Exploring Individual Differences in Visual Imagery and Special Cases
DeKock, K. (2025). Diverse minds: Exploring individual differences in visual imagery and special cases. The Confluence, 4(1). doi:10.62608/2150-2633.1069
This study explores the wide range of human experiences with visual imagery—from no imagery at all (aphantasia) to extremely vivid imagery (hyperphantasia). Visual imagery refers to the ability to picture things in the “mind’s eye,” and while most people can do this to some degree, the intensity varies greatly. Researchers examined how mental imagery connects to memory, learning, creativity, and emotion. People with hyperphantasia often have highly detailed mental pictures that can enhance creativity but may also increase emotional sensitivity or distress, especially when recalling negative experiences. On the other end, individuals with aphantasia tend to rely more on logic and facts than mental pictures. This can make emotional recall or visualization-based learning more difficult, but many adapt well and excel in fields like science or math. To study these differences, researchers used self-report questionnaires (where participants describe their own imagery experiences) and performance tasks. While self-reporting has limitations, it remains one of the best tools available for now. The study also highlighted that personality, gender, and brain structure might all play a role in how vivid someone's imagery is. Understanding these individual differences helps researchers, educators, and clinicians better support people across the imagery spectrum. The paper calls for more research, especially on hyperphantasia and the “in-between” experiences, to better understand how our inner worlds shape our outer lives.
Research
Mental imagery through the lens of aphantasia
Scholz, C. O. (2025). Mental imagery through the lens of aphantasia. Mind & Language. doi:10.1111/mila.12560
A debate has emerged in aphantasia research: could people who can't consciously visualize actually have "unconscious" mental imagery happening in their brains? Philosopher Bence Nanay proposed this possibility, suggesting that aphantasics might still generate visual representations without being aware of them. To test this theory, researchers used brain imaging technology to observe the minds of people with aphantasia and typical visualizers during imagery tasks. They looked for "shared representations"—matching brain patterns between imagination and actual seeing. In typical visualizers, these patterns overlapped significantly, like two puzzle pieces fitting together. However, in people with aphantasia, the brain patterns were completely different between seeing and imagining, even though their brains were still active during imagery attempts. The research also explored whether aphantasics might have unconscious imagery triggered by sounds or other senses. While some brain activity occurred, it didn’t show the same signature patterns as conscious visual processing. Interestingly, when researchers tested the Stroop effect (where reading color words interferes with naming ink colors), people with aphantasia showed a reduced effect, supporting the idea that mental imagery normally plays a role in this task. The conclusion challenges Nanay’s theory: people with aphantasia don’t appear to have unconscious visual imagery. Instead, they likely use entirely different cognitive strategies, such as verbal or spatial reasoning, to accomplish tasks that others solve through mental pictures.
Research
Aphantasia reimagined
Phillips, I. (2025). Aphantasia reimagined. Nous (Detroit, Mich.). doi:10.1111/nous.12551
In this research paper, philosopher and cognitive scientist Ian Phillips offers a new perspective on aphantasia—the inability to visualize in the mind’s eye—that helps explain a long-standing puzzle: why do people who report no mental imagery still perform normally on tasks that seem to require it? Phillips argues that the confusion stems from a flawed assumption that all mental imagery can be measured along a single scale of vividness. Instead, he introduces a key distinction between two types of imagery: *visual-object imagery* (the ability to picture detailed scenes, colors, or shapes) and *spatial imagery* (the ability to mentally manipulate objects or understand spatial layouts). While people with aphantasia often lack visual-object imagery, many retain strong spatial imagery, which supports their performance on tasks like mental rotation or memory for object placement—even if they don’t consciously “see” anything. Because standard questionnaires focus narrowly on visual vividness, they miss this preserved ability. By recognizing these different forms of imagery, Phillips proposes that aphantasia is not a total absence of mental imagery but a varied set of imagery differences, similar to how perception itself can be selectively impaired. This more nuanced understanding better captures the diversity of aphantasic experience and calls for improved tools that reflect the full range of our inner worlds.