Aphantasia Logo
Back to all research
Aphantasia Logo

Building awareness and understanding of aphantasia through research, education, and community support.

About

  • What is Aphantasia?
  • What is Hyperphantasia?
  • Take Assessment
  • Getting Started
  • Newsletter
  • About Us
  • Contact

Community

  • Premium Membership
  • Find support
  • Discussions
  • Events
  • Visualize

For Professionals

  • Overview
  • Free Introduction
  • Counselor Training
  • Educator Training
  • List Your Practice
  • Pricing & Bundles

Resources

  • Articles & Stories
  • Videos & Interviews
  • Aphantasia Course
  • FAQs

Research

  • Research Library
  • Participate in Studies
  • Recruitment Services

© 2026 Aphantasia Network. All rights reserved.

  • Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
Aphantasia Logo
Back to all research
Aphantasia Logo

Building awareness and understanding of aphantasia through research, education, and community support.

About

  • What is Aphantasia?
  • What is Hyperphantasia?
  • Take Assessment
  • Getting Started
  • Newsletter
  • About Us
  • Contact

Community

  • Premium Membership
  • Find support
  • Discussions
  • Events
  • Visualize

For Professionals

  • Overview
  • Free Introduction
  • Counselor Training
  • Educator Training
  • List Your Practice
  • Pricing & Bundles

Resources

  • Articles & Stories
  • Videos & Interviews
  • Aphantasia Course
  • FAQs

Research

  • Research Library
  • Participate in Studies
  • Recruitment Services

© 2026 Aphantasia Network. All rights reserved.

  • Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
Ask AI About This Paper
Ask AI About This Paper

Neurodiversity in mental simulation: conceptual but not visual imagery priming modulates perception across the imagery vividness spectrum

DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-05100-2
Tags:
Measurement & Assessment
Welker, Á., Pető-Plaszkó, O., Verebélyi, L., Gombos, F., Winkler, I., & Kovács, I. (2025). Neurodiversity in mental simulation: conceptual but not visual imagery priming modulates perception across the imagery vividness spectrum. Scientific Reports, 15(1). doi:10.1038/s41598-025-05100-2

Abstract

Mental simulation—the ability to internally model sensory, conceptual, or future events—may include mental imagery as a component, with considerable individual variability in its vividness and dependence on sensory detail. While self-reports have been widely used to assess imagery, they are subjective and prone to bias. Among more objective methods, imagery priming in binocular rivalry has been employed to investigate the influence of mental imagery on perception, but findings have been ambiguous. Here, we introduce a no-report version of the task, using eye-tracking-based optokinetic nystagmus assessment to provide a more reliable measure of perceptual shifts. In addition to visual imagery priming, we introduce conceptual priming, which does not rely on sensory imagery but engages abstract representations. In visual imagery priming, perceptual modulation correlated with self-reported vividness, and participants with low vividness did not show modulatory effects. However, in conceptual priming, effects were observed across the entire vividness spectrum, demonstrating that both concrete sensory-based and abstract conceptual representations can influence perception. These findings challenge purely sensory accounts of mental imagery. We propose avoiding deficit-based terms such as “aphantasia” and advocate for a neuroaffirmative perspective on mental simulation diversity.

Authors

  • Ágnes Welker1
  • Orsolya Pető-Plaszkó1
  • Luca Verebélyi1
  • Ferenc Gombos2
  • István Winkler1
  • Ilona Kovács2

Neurodiversity in mental simulation: conceptual but not visual imagery priming modulates perception across the imagery vividness spectrum

DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-05100-2
Tags:
Measurement & Assessment
Welker, Á., Pető-Plaszkó, O., Verebélyi, L., Gombos, F., Winkler, I., & Kovács, I. (2025). Neurodiversity in mental simulation: conceptual but not visual imagery priming modulates perception across the imagery vividness spectrum. Scientific Reports, 15(1). doi:10.1038/s41598-025-05100-2

Abstract

Mental simulation—the ability to internally model sensory, conceptual, or future events—may include mental imagery as a component, with considerable individual variability in its vividness and dependence on sensory detail. While self-reports have been widely used to assess imagery, they are subjective and prone to bias. Among more objective methods, imagery priming in binocular rivalry has been employed to investigate the influence of mental imagery on perception, but findings have been ambiguous. Here, we introduce a no-report version of the task, using eye-tracking-based optokinetic nystagmus assessment to provide a more reliable measure of perceptual shifts. In addition to visual imagery priming, we introduce conceptual priming, which does not rely on sensory imagery but engages abstract representations. In visual imagery priming, perceptual modulation correlated with self-reported vividness, and participants with low vividness did not show modulatory effects. However, in conceptual priming, effects were observed across the entire vividness spectrum, demonstrating that both concrete sensory-based and abstract conceptual representations can influence perception. These findings challenge purely sensory accounts of mental imagery. We propose avoiding deficit-based terms such as “aphantasia” and advocate for a neuroaffirmative perspective on mental simulation diversity.

Authors

  • Ágnes Welker1
  • Orsolya Pető-Plaszkó1
  • Luca Verebélyi1
  • Ferenc Gombos2
  • István Winkler1
  • Ilona Kovács2

What This Study Is About

Researchers wanted to know if people with aphantasia—the inability to create mental images—can still influence their own perception using "conceptual" thoughts instead of pictures. They tested whether simply thinking about a direction (like "left") could change what a person sees, even if they can't "see" that direction in their mind's eye.

How They Studied It

The study included 119 participants who were grouped by their imagery strength: those with aphantasia, those with typical imagery, and those with hyperphantasia (extremely vivid imagery).
Participants performed a "binocular rivalry" task. This involves showing a different image to each eye simultaneously (for example, stripes moving left in one eye and right in the other). Usually, the brain flips back and forth between the two images. Before this, participants were asked to do one of two things:
1. Visual Imagery: Imagine the stripes moving in a specific direction.
2. Conceptual Thinking: Think about the word for the direction (e.g., silently repeating "left, left, left") without trying to picture it.
The researchers used high-tech eye-tracking to measure "involuntary eye flickers" (nystagmus). This allowed them to see exactly which image the brain was choosing without the participant having to press any buttons.

What They Found

As expected, people with typical or vivid imagery could influence what they saw by "picturing" it beforehand. People with aphantasia could not influence their vision this way.
However, when asked to simply think about the direction conceptually, people with aphantasia were successful. Their thoughts influenced their vision just as effectively as the "picturing" method worked for others. This suggests that while the "visual" path is closed for aphantasics, a "conceptual" path remains open and powerful.

What This Might Mean

This suggests that aphantasia isn't a lack of "mental simulation," but rather a different style of it. While most people use sensory "pictures" to prime their brains, people with aphantasia may use abstract or linguistic concepts to achieve similar results. It challenges the idea that mental imagery is the only way our internal thoughts can shape how we see the world.

One Interesting Detail

The researchers used eye-tracking to make the test "objective." Because our eyes naturally follow the direction of movement we are perceiving, the researchers could tell what a participant was seeing just by watching their pupils, even if the participant wasn't aware of it themselves.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain errors. Always refer to the original paper for accuracy.
Aphantasia Logo
Most-Cited Researchers
Top 10 researchers by number of papers published in Aphantasia
1

Joel Pearson

35
2

Merlin Monzel

30
3

Adam Zeman

20
4

Rebecca Keogh

17
5

Martin Reuter

16
6

Juha Silvanto

14
7

Paolo Bartolomeo

11
8

Carla Dance

10
9

Jianghao Liu

9
10

Fraser Milton

9
Recruit the largest aphantasia cohort on earth

97.4K+ users & subscribers across the imagery spectrum, plus 1.5M+ survey responses in our dataset. Skip the recruitment bottleneck and run your study with the community we've built for a decade.

Partner with us