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

Internal Consistency and Construct Validity of Two Versions of the Revised Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire

DOI: 10.2466/04.22.pms.113.5.454-460
Campos, A. (2011). Internal consistency and construct validity of two versions of the revised vividness of visual imagery questionnaire. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 113(2), 454–460. doi:10.2466/04.22.pms.113.5.454-460

Abstract

The Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ; Marks, 1973) is the questionnaire most extensively used to measure imagery vividness, but two newer versions have been developed. In this study, the reliability and construct validity of these two measures were assessed: the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire–2 (VVIQ–2) and the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire–Revised Version (VVIQ–RV). A total of 206 undergraduate psychology students completed both questionnaires, and to assess construct validity, they also completed the Object-Spatial Imagery and Verbal Questionnaire (OSIVQ), Betts' Questionnaire Upon Mental Imagery (Betts' QMI), and the Measure of Ability to Form Spatial Mental Imagery (MASMI). Internal consistency reliability for both was high, with the VVIQ–RV having a Cronbach's alpha of .96, and the VVIQ–2 an alpha of .91. The construct validity of the VVIQ–RV and the VVIQ–2 was supported by the high correlations they had with the other three measures of imagery, which were all close to .50, and the very small correlations (.06–.07) they had with the Verbal scale of the OSIVQ, indicating that they validly measured the imagery construct. Thus, the findings support the two versions as equally valid psychometric instruments for measuring image vividness.

Authors

  • Alfredo Campos1
Ask AI About This Paper

Internal Consistency and Construct Validity of Two Versions of the Revised Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire

DOI: 10.2466/04.22.pms.113.5.454-460
Campos, A. (2011). Internal consistency and construct validity of two versions of the revised vividness of visual imagery questionnaire. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 113(2), 454–460. doi:10.2466/04.22.pms.113.5.454-460

Abstract

The Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ; Marks, 1973) is the questionnaire most extensively used to measure imagery vividness, but two newer versions have been developed. In this study, the reliability and construct validity of these two measures were assessed: the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire–2 (VVIQ–2) and the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire–Revised Version (VVIQ–RV). A total of 206 undergraduate psychology students completed both questionnaires, and to assess construct validity, they also completed the Object-Spatial Imagery and Verbal Questionnaire (OSIVQ), Betts' Questionnaire Upon Mental Imagery (Betts' QMI), and the Measure of Ability to Form Spatial Mental Imagery (MASMI). Internal consistency reliability for both was high, with the VVIQ–RV having a Cronbach's alpha of .96, and the VVIQ–2 an alpha of .91. The construct validity of the VVIQ–RV and the VVIQ–2 was supported by the high correlations they had with the other three measures of imagery, which were all close to .50, and the very small correlations (.06–.07) they had with the Verbal scale of the OSIVQ, indicating that they validly measured the imagery construct. Thus, the findings support the two versions as equally valid psychometric instruments for measuring image vividness.

Authors

  • Alfredo Campos1
Most-Cited Researchers
Top 10 researchers by number of papers published in Aphantasia
1

Joel Pearson

33
2

Merlin Monzel

31
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

10
10

Fraser Milton

9
Recruit from the largest aphantasia cohort on earth

94.6K+ users & subscribers across the imagery spectrum, plus 1.5M+ survey responsesin our dataset. Skip the recruitment bottleneck and run your study with the community we've built for a decade.

Partner with us
Aphantasia Logo

What This Study Is About

Researchers wanted to know if two newer versions of a popular test for "mental imagery"—the ability to picture things in your mind—were accurate and reliable. They compared these tests to see which one best measures how vividly people can "see" thoughts.

How They Studied It

The study involved 206 university students in Spain. Each student completed several different questionnaires that asked them to rate the clarity of images in their mind. Two of these were updated versions of the "Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire" (VVIQ), which is the most common tool used to identify aphantasia (a condition where people cannot create mental images at all). The researchers also gave them tests to see if their "picture-thinking" scores were different from their "word-thinking" scores.

What They Found

The researchers found that both new versions of the test worked very well. Both the 5-point scale version (VVIQ-2) and the 7-point scale version (VVIQ-RV) were highly consistent. The scores on these tests matched up well with other established imagery tests but did not overlap with verbal or language tests. This shows that the questionnaires are specifically measuring mental pictures rather than just general intelligence or vocabulary.

What This Might Mean

This suggests that researchers have multiple reliable tools to study how people experience mental imagery. Whether a test uses a 5-point or 7-point scale, or whether participants have their eyes open or closed, the results remain steady. However, because the study only looked at college students, we don't yet know if these specific tests work exactly the same way for people of all ages.

One Interesting Detail

While the tests were great at measuring how "vivid" or clear a mental picture was, they didn't necessarily predict how well someone could solve a spatial puzzle (like mentally rotating a shape), suggesting that "seeing" an image and "moving" it in your mind might be two different skills.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain errors. Always refer to the original paper for accuracy.