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

No general pathological significance of aphantasia: An evaluation based on criteria for mental disorders

DOI: 10.1111/sjop.12887
Tags:
HyperphantasiaPhantasia
Monzel, M., Vetterlein, A., & Reuter, M. (2023). No general pathological significance of aphantasia: an evaluation based on criteria for mental disorders. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 64(3), 314–324. doi:10.1111/sjop.12887

Abstract

As awareness of the phenomenon of aphantasia (= lack of voluntary imagery) has increased in recent years, many psychotherapists ponder its clinical implications. The present study investigates whether aphantasia meets the criteria for mental disorders, i.e. statistical rarity, impairment in activities of daily living, violation of social norms and inappropriate behavior and personal distress. Prevalence of aphantasia was determined meta‐analytically based on 3,543 participants. An international sample of 156 participants with aphantasia (58.3% male; Mage = 35.23) and 131 controls (65.6% male; Mage = 28.88) was assessed with the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test, the Questionnaire for the Assessment of Everyday Memory Performance and the Aphantasia Distress Questionnaire, as well as measures of depression, anxiety and well‐being. The prevalence of aphantasia was estimated at 3.5 to 4.8%. Participants with aphantasia scored significantly lower than controls on every day and autobiographical memory, but not on theory of mind. A subgroup of 34.7% of participants with aphantasia reported distress significantly associated with lower well‐being and high levels of anxiety and depression. The level of distress increased with poorer performance in autobiographical memory and theory of mind. Although aphantasia meets the criterion of statistical rarity, the impact on activities of daily living and personal distress is too weak to justify a classification as a mental disorder. In a subgroup, however, distress can reach clinically relevant levels. In individual cases, it is therefore advisable to conduct a psychological assessment, for example by means of the Aphantasia Distress Questionnaire.

Authors

  • Merlin Monzel30
  • Annabel Vetterlein4
  • Martin Reuter16

No general pathological significance of aphantasia: An evaluation based on criteria for mental disorders

DOI: 10.1111/sjop.12887
Tags:
HyperphantasiaPhantasia
Monzel, M., Vetterlein, A., & Reuter, M. (2023). No general pathological significance of aphantasia: an evaluation based on criteria for mental disorders. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 64(3), 314–324. doi:10.1111/sjop.12887

Abstract

As awareness of the phenomenon of aphantasia (= lack of voluntary imagery) has increased in recent years, many psychotherapists ponder its clinical implications. The present study investigates whether aphantasia meets the criteria for mental disorders, i.e. statistical rarity, impairment in activities of daily living, violation of social norms and inappropriate behavior and personal distress. Prevalence of aphantasia was determined meta‐analytically based on 3,543 participants. An international sample of 156 participants with aphantasia (58.3% male; Mage = 35.23) and 131 controls (65.6% male; Mage = 28.88) was assessed with the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test, the Questionnaire for the Assessment of Everyday Memory Performance and the Aphantasia Distress Questionnaire, as well as measures of depression, anxiety and well‐being. The prevalence of aphantasia was estimated at 3.5 to 4.8%. Participants with aphantasia scored significantly lower than controls on every day and autobiographical memory, but not on theory of mind. A subgroup of 34.7% of participants with aphantasia reported distress significantly associated with lower well‐being and high levels of anxiety and depression. The level of distress increased with poorer performance in autobiographical memory and theory of mind. Although aphantasia meets the criterion of statistical rarity, the impact on activities of daily living and personal distress is too weak to justify a classification as a mental disorder. In a subgroup, however, distress can reach clinically relevant levels. In individual cases, it is therefore advisable to conduct a psychological assessment, for example by means of the Aphantasia Distress Questionnaire.

Authors

  • Merlin Monzel30
  • Annabel Vetterlein4
  • Martin Reuter16
Aphantasia Logo

What This Study Is About

Researchers investigated whether aphantasia—the inability to create mental images in the "mind's eye"—should be classified as a mental disorder. They looked at whether it causes significant distress or impairment in daily life compared to standard clinical criteria.

How They Studied It

The study compared 156 people with aphantasia to 131 people with typical imagery. Participants completed several assessments, including:
  • Memory tests: Measuring "autobiographical memory" (recalling personal life events) and "everyday memory" (remembering names or where you put your keys).
  • Theory of Mind: A test to see how well they could understand others' emotions and mental states.
  • Mental Health Screeners: Questionnaires for depression, anxiety, and general well-being.
  • Distress Scale: A new tool called the Aphantasia Distress Questionnaire to measure how much their lack of imagery bothered them.

What They Found

The researchers found that aphantasia does not meet the official requirements for a mental disorder. While people with aphantasia reported weaker autobiographical memory, they were generally able to navigate daily life just as well as others. Most participants (about 65%) reported little to no distress about their lack of imagery. However, a smaller subgroup (roughly 35%) did experience significant distress, often linked to higher levels of anxiety or depression.

What This Might Mean

This suggests that for the vast majority of people, aphantasia is a "cognitive variation"—a different way of thinking—rather than a medical condition. While it may make certain types of memory more difficult, most people naturally develop workarounds. The study highlights that while aphantasia itself isn't a disorder, the discovery of having it can sometimes cause temporary emotional distress, similar to an "adjustment disorder."

One Interesting Detail

The study found that people with aphantasia were just as good at "Theory of Mind" (understanding what others are thinking or feeling) as those with vivid imagery, suggesting that you don't need to "see" a person's reaction in your head to understand their emotions.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain errors. Always refer to the original paper for accuracy.
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

97.7K+ 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