Sign in
Join

Aphantasia Research

Participate in Research

Evolving library of aphantasia research. Discover the science behind extreme imagination, aphantasia and hyperphantasia. Share the latest knowledge.

Non-visual spatial strategies are effective for maintaining precise information in visual working memory
Reeder, R. R., Pounder, Z., Figueroa, A., Jüllig, A., & Azañón, E. (2024). Non-visual spatial strategies are effective for maintaining precise information in visual working memory. Cognition, 251(105907), 105907. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105907
The study explored how people with different levels of visual imagery use various strategies to perform tasks that are typically thought to rely on visual working memory. Visual working memory involves holding and manipulating visual information temporarily, such as remembering the orientation of patterns. Researchers tested participants with varying degrees of visual imagery ability, including those with aphantasia and those with typical or vivid imagery. Participants were asked to remember and identify changes in the orientation of visual patterns and report the strategies they used—whether visual, spatial, verbal, semantic, or sensorimotor. The findings revealed that people with aphantasia performed just as well as those with typical visual imagery, despite using different strategies. Aphantasics primarily relied on non-visual strategies, like spatial reasoning and sensorimotor techniques (e.g., mentally simulating movements), rather than visual imagery. Conversely, those with typical imagery often used a mix of visual and spatial strategies. This suggests that non-visual strategies can be just as effective as visual ones for tasks traditionally thought to require visual processing. The study challenges the long-standing view that visual working memory tasks must be performed using visual mental images and highlights the flexibility of cognitive strategies across different individuals.
Phantasia, aphantasia, and hyperphantasia: Empirical data and conceptual considerations
Larner, A. J., Leff, A. P., & Nachev, P. C. (2024). Phantasia, aphantasia, and hyperphantasia: Empirical data and conceptual considerations. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 164(105819), 105819. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2024.105819
This study explores the concept of "phantasia," which refers to a person's ability to create visual mental images in their mind. The researchers examine the extremes of this ability, known as "aphantasia" (little to no mental imagery) and "hyperphantasia" (exceptionally vivid mental imagery). The study primarily involved analyzing existing research and literature on the topic, rather than conducting new experiments with participants. The authors highlight some key issues in the field, including: Confusion between actual visual perceptions and mental images, which are fundamentally different. Reliance on unvalidated questionnaires, like the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ), to assess a person's mental imagery abilities. Lack of clear definitions and conceptual framework for studying phantasia, aphantasia, and hyperphantasia. The researchers argue that these conceptual confusions may hinder scientific progress in understanding how mental imagery works in the brain. They suggest that future studies should focus on developing a more precise conceptual framework before conducting further experiments. Key insights include the recognition that mental imagery is a complex topic that has long puzzled scientists and philosophers. The authors emphasize the need for clearer definitions and more robust methods to study this internal experience, as current approaches may be based on flawed assumptions about the nature of mental images.
Propositional thought is sufficient for imaginal extinction as shown by contrasting participants with aphantasia, simulated aphantasia, and controls
Monzel, M., Agren, T., Tengler, M., J. Karneboge, & Reuter, M. (2024). Propositional thought is sufficient for imaginal extinction as shown by contrasting participants with aphantasia, simulated aphantasia, and controls.
The study explores the effectiveness of imaginal exposure, a cognitive-behavioral therapy technique for anxiety and panic disorders. This technique uses mental imagery to simulate exposure to fear-inducing stimuli when real-life exposure is not feasible. Peter Lang's Bio-Informational Theory suggests that vivid mental imagery closely resembles real events, making imaginal exposure effective. However, some findings indicate that simply thinking about fear stimuli (propositional thought) might suffice in therapy, potentially reducing emotional distress. The research investigates whether vivid mental imagery or propositional thought is more crucial for successful imaginal exposure by comparing participants with aphantasia (no sensory mental imagery) and control groups. Results showed that visual imagery isn't necessary for effective therapy. People with aphantasia felt less fear during therapy sessions but had similar physical reactions compared to others. This suggests that their focus on external rather than internal feelings might explain why they feel less fear. This overlap with alexithymia, a condition where people have difficulty identifying and describing emotions, points to a shared mechanism. Overall, imaginal exposure therapy could be effective and less stressful for those with aphantasia.

Become a member to see all aphantasia research summaries