Aphantasia can shape how people learn, but not whether they can. Many develop alternative strategies, from verbal notes to hands-on practice.

Film adaptations and illustrations can clash with our personal mental images. However, for those with aphantasia, who cannot mentally visualize, these on-screen adaptations offer a uniquely liberating way to experience stories.
Julia Thomas · July 2026

In Part 2 of her review, Hollis Robbins explores what Zeman's book means for those who imagine without images. Drawing on her own experiences with chess, psychedelics, and poetry, she argues that aphantasia is not a deficit but a different cognitive architecture—one that models the world through language. She then turns to presidential rhetoric to ask a provocative question: did Ronald Reagan have aphantasia? And what does it mean when the rhetorical patterns of 'the great communicator' look strikingly like those of an LLM?
Hollis Robbins · February 2026

Hollis Robbins reveals how Mississippi's reading revolution validates what people with aphantasia have always known: you don't need mental pictures to decode language. This essay argues that teaching reading as pure pattern-matching and code-breaking—not visualization—prepares all students for an AI-saturated world.
Hollis Robbins · December 2025

Many assume that everyone can picture scenes in the mind’s eye—but history reveals otherwise. This article explores nineteenth-century writers and scientists who recognized readers without mental imagery—what we now call aphantasia. From George du Maurier to Francis Galton, it traces the surprising origins of today’s understanding of aphantasic readers.
Julia Thomas · October 2025
Martin and colleagues · Learning and Individual Differences
Among 1,451 high school students, weaker imagery went with lower science scores, a gap that was smaller where students said teachers reduced mental load. The authors suggest such teaching may help weak imagers, but the data cannot show cause.
Yavuz and Nazir · Language, Cognition and Neuroscience
In 158 English-speaking adults, how vividly people said they could picture things was not linked to the size of their vocabulary overall. Word by word, people with more vivid imagery did slightly worse on the most concrete words, such as tweezers or octopus, and in an exploratory comparison the 24 people with the weakest imagery scored higher than the 24 with the most vivid, about 82 against 76 out of 100. The authors suggest people with weak imagery may lean on word-based definitions, and call the findings provisional until they are repeated.
Li and Guan · Journal of Emerging Investigators
In an online survey of 302 Canadian students aged 16 to 18, those who said they were fluent in two or more languages rated their visual imagery as more vivid, on average, than those fluent in one. Ten students reported very weak or no imagery, and eight of them spoke one language. A one-time survey with self-rated fluency cannot show that languages change imagery, and the paper's figure that languages explain 97% of the differences in scores came from five group averages, one of them a single person.
Monzel, Vetterlein and Reuter · Journal of Neuropsychology
In an online study, 67 people with aphantasia and 32 people with more imagery, grouped by an imagery questionnaire, did four timed memory tasks: recalling spoken words, redrawing seven lines they had just seen, recognizing the earlier words in a longer list, and picking out and completing complex shapes seen earlier. The aphantasia group scored lower on average, by a small to moderate margin, and the gap did not differ reliably between tasks. The authors suggest imagery supports memory even for words, but the study was not preregistered and they note that missing imagery may not be the direct cause.
Struggling with Mandarin? Share your experiences or tips for learning character-based languages without relying on mental imagery!
Andrew · · 1 reply
Is reading fiction mentally exhausting for you? Do you find yourself re-reading passages or relying heavily on verbal memory? Share your thoughts!
Alex · · 2 replies