Learning with aphantasia presents a unique educational journey that challenges our assumptions about how the mind processes information. In our increasingly visual world, where education systems are built around the premise that most people can "see" information in their mind's eye, what happens to learners who experience the world with little or no mental imagery? Among adults, about 4% score in the aphantasia range on the standard imagery questionnaire, and about 1% report no visual imagery at all. How many children have it isn't known yet.
The answer is more complex and fascinating than early researchers initially imagined.
The Visual Foundation of Modern Education
Walk into many classrooms today, and you'll hear students asked to "picture this" or "visualize the problem." The authors of a
You’ve used your five free reads
Members read everything here, and put their own questions to the researchers at live talks.
Every talk recorded, with the questions
The members’ Discord, between talks
The Aphantasia Explained course, with Annual
Prices in US dollars, plus tax where it applies. 30 days to change your mind.
put it plainly: "many classroom teachers encourage students to create visual images as a standard practice for reading comprehension." You may also hear that most students are "visual learners." That idea has little support: a
found any benefit of matching "too small and too infrequent" to justify wide use.
Research with typical learners has found that forming mental images can help people remember material that is easy to picture, such as concrete words. But in a major review of ten study techniques, the two imagery-based methods were rated low in usefulness because their benefits are narrow, while practice testing and spacing study over time were rated highest. Neither of those needs a picture.
This reliance on visualization isn't arbitrary. For many readers, mental images are part of what brings a story to life. In one study, readers with aphantasia felt less absorbed in a short story than other readers, yet recalled it as well and liked it as much.
But this educational foundation rests on an assumption that not everyone shares: the ability to create mental images at will.
Learning with Aphantasia: When Mental Imagery Isn't Available
The term "aphantasia" – describing the inability to create visual mental images – was coined in 2015 by neurologist Adam Zeman and his colleagues at the University of Exeter. While scientists have documented this phenomenon since the 1880s, its recent naming has sparked important conversations about learning differences and educational approaches.
For people with aphantasia, the standard educational experience can feel fundamentally disconnected. Where classmates describe "seeing" diagrams in their heads during study sessions, those with aphantasia work with entirely different mental processes – thinking in words, concepts, or abstract ideas rather than pictures.
The condition often extends beyond visual imagery alone. Many people with aphantasia also experience limited mental sounds, reduced imagined touch sensations, and difficulty recalling specific tastes and smells. This creates a cognitive experience that differs markedly from the mental landscape most educational strategies assume.
The Learning Disability Debate
The emergence of aphantasia in public discourse has generated debate about its implications for learning. A 2016 Guardian article, "If you can't imagine things, how can you learn?", raised concerns about potential learning difficulties, since research with typical learners has linked mental imagery to reading comprehension and vocabulary learning.
Science writer Mo Costandi noted in the piece that no research had yet confirmed such difficulties, and wrote that "if it becomes clear that the condition does in fact impinge on children’s ability to learn, it may then be possible to devise alternative learning strategies for them."
Research since then has begun to test that concern, with mixed results so far.
Neurologist Adam Zeman, who led the team that named aphantasia, offered a more nuanced view in the same article: "We know that children with aphantasia tend not to enjoy descriptive texts, and this may well influence their reading comprehension." But, he added, "there isn’t any evidence directly linking it to learning disabilities yet."
Reframing the Question
Researcher Kathryn Bates, writing in BOLD in 2019, challenged the assumption that missing one cognitive ability necessarily impairs another cognitive ability. Her argument centers on the complexity of human learning and adaptation.
"What we need to be wary of is the inference that because ability A (creating mental images) can enhance ability B (reading comprehension) then the absence of ability A is likely to lead to the absence of ability B," Bates cautioned. "As we know, this is simply not always the case in learning."
She illustrated this point with a musical analogy: "Reading sheet music might aid your ability to learn to play the piano, however, not being able to read sheet music does not mean you will not be able to learn to play the piano."
This reframing suggests that rather than viewing aphantasia as a limitation, researchers and educators might better understand it as an alternative cognitive pathway that could reveal new insights about how we learn, or, more importantly, how different minds learn in other ways.
Different Routes to the Same Answers
Research into aphantasia has turned up some surprises, particularly in spatial reasoning. Mental rotation, the ability to turn objects in the mind, was long assumed to require visualization. This skill underlies everything from reading maps to solving geometric problems to fitting luggage into car trunks.
Yet people with aphantasia solve mental rotation problems. In a 2024 study, they were slower than people with typical imagery but more accurate, and they favored analytic strategies, such as counting cubes, rather than turning the whole object in the mind. Earlier studies had found about the same accuracy in both groups.
The finding points to something broader than rotation puzzles: people with aphantasia often reach the same answers by other routes. For example:
Words and concepts: describing, listing and reasoning in words instead of picturing.
Space and movement: on a precise visual memory task, people with aphantasia did as well as typical imagers and said they relied on spatial and movement-based strategies rather than pictures.
Pictures outside the head: people with aphantasia still remember real pictures better than words, as typical imagers do, so diagrams, photos and sketches keep their value.
Aphantasia Success Stories
Individual stories aren't evidence about learners in general, but they show what's possible: people with aphantasia have succeeded at the highest levels of visually demanding fields.
Ed Catmull co-founded Pixar and served as president of Walt Disney Animation Studios, companies built on visual imagination. Craig Venter led the team reporting the first draft sequence of the human genome. Blake Ross co-created Mozilla Firefox, revolutionizing web browsing. Glen Keane animated some of Disney's most beloved characters, including The Little Mermaid. John Green wrote "The Fault in Our Stars," one of the most successful young adult novels of recent decades, showing that rich, emotionally resonant storytelling doesn't require the author to visualize scenes.
Their stories show that this kind of work doesn't depend on picturing things in the mind.
Theoretical Frameworks for Understanding Learning Differences
Allan Paivio's Dual Coding Theory, proposed in 1971, offers one lens for understanding how people with aphantasia might learn effectively. The theory suggests that information can be stored and processed through two independent but interacting systems: verbal and nonverbal (imagery).
For people with aphantasia, this framework is relevant because it treats imagery as only one of two pathways for handling information. Studies that asked people with aphantasia about their strategies have found mixed answers: some describe labeling what they need to remember, while on a precise visual memory task they said they relied on spatial strategies more than on words.
However, Dual Coding Theory has limitations. It assumes cognitive processing relies primarily on words and images, potentially overlooking other methods of information handling that people with aphantasia might develop.
As research into learning with aphantasia continues, novel insights may reveal new cognitive pathways that expand our understanding of human learning capacity entirely.
The Current Aphantasia Research Landscape
Research on learning with aphantasia remains in its early stages. Aphantasia isn't classed as a learning disability, and in small studies of grades (one, another), mostly of adults, people with aphantasia haven't done worse overall. But research with students is only beginning: in a 2026 survey of 1,451 Australian students in grades 7 to 10, weaker self-reported imagery went with lower science test scores, and the gap was smaller where students said their teachers made new material easier at first and gave help, practice and feedback. Many questions remain about the strategies people with aphantasia use to learn.
Some people, on discovering their aphantasia, worry about past learning challenges or link academic difficulties to it. Some of those difficulties may be real, but many people's stories also show how adaptable people are, finding other strategies when picturing isn't available.
The challenge for researchers is mapping these alternative strategies systematically. Understanding how successful people with aphantasia learn could reveal new educational approaches that benefit not just those with the condition, but learners more broadly.
Implications for Education
The growing awareness of aphantasia raises important questions about educational practice. If a significant portion of learners cannot access visualization-based teaching methods, educational systems may need to expand their methodological toolkit.
This doesn't necessarily mean wholesale changes to curricula, but rather recognition that effective teaching involves multiple pathways to the same learning objectives. For some students, "picture this" instructions are meaningless, but "consider the logical relationships" or "think about the verbal descriptions" might unlock the same understanding. Putting the picture on the page, with a diagram, a model or a photo, can do the same.
The key insight emerging from aphantasia research is that learning differences don't necessarily represent learning deficits. Instead, they may reveal the remarkable diversity of human cognitive architecture and the multiple pathways through which knowledge can be acquired and applied.
Learning With Aphantasia
Learning with aphantasia represents more than just an interesting neurological phenomenon – it's a window into the fundamental diversity of human cognition. As aphantasia research continues, these investigations may reveal not just how people without mental imagery learn, but new approaches to learning that could benefit everyone.
The story of aphantasia and learning is still being written. Each aphantasia study, each personal account, and each successful adaptation adds to our understanding of the remarkable flexibility of human minds. Rather than viewing aphantasia as a limitation to overcome, we might better understand it as an alternative cognitive pathway that offers unique insights into the multiple ways humans can successfully navigate and understand their world.
For the millions of people learning with aphantasia, the research so far is encouraging: different doesn't have to mean deficient.
Learning with aphantasia presents a unique educational journey that challenges our assumptions about how the mind processes information. In our increasingly visual world, where education systems are built around the premise that most people can "see" information in their mind's eye, what happens to learners who experience the world with little or no mental imagery? Among adults, about 4%
The answer is more complex and fascinating than early researchers initially imagined.
The Visual Foundation of Modern Education
Aphantasia Network is shaping a new, global conversation on the power of image-free thinking. We’re creating a place to discover and learn about aphantasia. Our mission is to help build a bridge between new scientific discoveries and our unique human experience — to uncover new insight into how we learn, create, dream, remember and more with blind imagination.
Jennifer McDougall is a co-founder of the Aphantasia Network with Tom Ebeyer, where she serves as Editor and Community Lead. Her work champions research, advocacy, and support for aphantasia on a global scale. With a background in foresight, Jennifer's realization that people imagine the future differently ignited an insatiable curiosity about our invisible differences. This passion drives her exploration of the diverse landscape of human imagination, bridging ancient wisdom with modern neuroscience. Through her writing and community leadership, Jennifer continues to shed light on the fascinating world of aphantasia, challenging conventional notions of imagination and paving the way for greater understanding of cognitive diversity.
Was this helpful?
Image-Free Insights
A short note from our founder, Tom Ebeyer, every other week, plus occasional news and invitations to take part in studies. Change what you get from any email.
Direct Experience: Meditation Without a Mind’s Eye
When you can't picture anything in your mind, meditation can seem off-limits. But the absence of mental imagery may be a gateway, not a barrier—one that leads more directly into presence and the heart of awareness.
Linda Wright · February 2026
The Power of Abstract Thinking in Aphantasia
The concept of 'tokens' and 'types' helped me understand how we think differently: visualizers use specific imagery, while aphantasics excel in abstract thinking.
Tom Ebeyer · February 2024
3 Ways to Motivate Yourself Without Visualization
How do you stay motivated to achieve your goals if you can't visualize them? Discover alternative motivational strategies without visualization.
