Abstract
Mental imagery is a ubiquitous phenomenon for many people. Its absence - aphantasia - has recently attracted increasing scientific interest. Individuals with aphantasia are found to perform as well as typical imagers in most areas. Several studies have proposed that individuals with aphantasia might have a more ‘semantic and abstract’ mode of functioning. The present study aimed to better understand the cognitive profile of individuals with aphantasia by examining their performance regarding semantic and abstract processing. To that end, 45 participants with aphantasia and 51 controls completed questionnaires and behavioural tasks assessing sensory and spatial imagery, verbal strategies, verbal and non-verbal reasoning, and verbal and spatial working memory. Initial group comparisons revealed minimal differences. Rather than limiting our investigation to predefined group comparisons, we then adopted a trans-categorical, data-driven approach to uncover latent cognitive profiles based on task performance and subjective reports. Unsupervised clustering across the full sample revealed three clusters of cognitive profiles centred respectively on visual imagery, spatial imagery and verbal strategies. Crucially, individuals with aphantasia were distributed across two of these profiles. One showed low visual imagery but maintained multisensory imagery and high spatial imagery, while the other displayed low imagery across all sensory modalities and stronger reliance on verbal processing. These findings reveal significant heterogeneity within both aphantasia and control groups, extending beyond differences in visual imagery. They highlight the importance of considering spatial and verbal cognitive dimensions alongside visual phenomenology. By identifying cognitive profiles that transcend traditional imagery classifications, our results support a multidimensional framework for understanding how individual differences in mental representation relate to behaviour.
Understanding Aphantasia: A New Perspective on Mental Imagery
Overview/Introduction
This study explores the cognitive abilities of individuals with aphantasia, focusing on how they process information differently from those who can visualize images. The research aims to uncover whether people with aphantasia rely more on abstract and semantic processing, offering a fresh perspective on how mental imagery works.
Methodology
The study involved 96 participants, including 45 with aphantasia and 51 who can visualize images. Participants completed a series of questionnaires and tasks designed to assess various cognitive abilities, including:
Sensory and spatial imagery
Verbal and non-verbal reasoning
Verbal and spatial working memory
The researchers used a data-driven approach to analyze the results, employing unsupervised clustering to identify distinct cognitive profiles within the participants.
Key Findings
The study revealed three main cognitive profiles:
Visual Imagery Profile: Characterized by strong visual imagery abilities.
Spatial Imagery Profile: Strong in spatial imagery but weaker in visual imagery.
Verbal Strategies Profile: Relies heavily on verbal processing with low imagery across all sensory modalities.
Key insights include:
Individuals with aphantasia were found in two profiles: one with low visual imagery but good spatial imagery, and another with low imagery in all senses but strong verbal skills.
There is significant diversity in cognitive styles among both aphantasia and control groups, suggesting that mental imagery is more complex than previously thought.
Implications
These findings suggest that mental imagery is not a one-size-fits-all phenomenon. Instead, it involves a range of cognitive processes that vary from person to person. Understanding these differences can help tailor educational and cognitive therapies to individual needs, particularly for those with aphantasia who might benefit from strategies that leverage their verbal strengths.
Limitations
While the study provides valuable insights, it has some limitations:
The sample size was relatively small and not predetermined, which may affect the generalizability of the findings.
The study focused on French-speaking participants, which might limit its applicability to other linguistic and cultural contexts.
Overall, this research highlights the importance of considering multiple cognitive dimensions when studying mental imagery, paving the way for a more nuanced understanding of how people think and process information.