Where's Wanda? The influence of visual imagery vividness on visual search speed measured by means of hidden object pictures

"The Giant Black Elephant with white Tusks stood in a field of Green Grass": Cognitive and brain mechanisms underlying aphantasia

Aphantasia, a spectrum of inabilities creating and perceiving mental images, is becoming more of a focus in continued research to better understand functions of sensory perception and imagination. Current research on aphantasia is still in an era of exploration to find its underlying neural mechanisms, comorbidities and comparing levels of visual imagery to other cognitive functions. Through a systematic review, this article explores the most influential developments in aphantasia research. The search included 3 databases-PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science. After a rigorous selection process, 52 studies are included in this review. The findings include new research themes across different studies such as relationships between aphantasia and diminished episodic and autobiographical memory, comorbidities including autism, attention, emotions, and neurobiological differences. By integrating diverse perspectives, this review aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of the cognitive processes underlying mental imagery and offers implications for further development in aphantasia research.

A Systematic Review of Aphantasia: Concept, Measurement, Neural Basis, and Theory Development

People with aphantasia exhibit the inability to voluntarily generate or form mental imagery in their minds. Since the term "aphantasia" was proposed to describe this, it has gained increasing attention from psychiatrists, neuroscientists, and clinicians. Previous studies have mainly focused on the definition, prevalence, and measurement of aphantasia, its impacts on individuals' cognitive and emotional processing, and theoretical frameworks synthesizing existing findings, which have contributed greatly to our understanding of aphantasia. However, there are still some debates regarding the conclusions derived from existing research and the theories that were constructed from various sources of evidence. Building upon existing endeavors, this systematic review emphasizes that future research is much needed to refine the definition and diagnosis of aphantasia, strengthen empirical investigations at behavioral and neural levels, and, more importantly, develop or update theories. These multiple lines of efforts could lead to a deeper understanding of aphantasia and further guide researchers in future research directions.

Individual differences in visual search: A systematic review of the link between visual search performance and traits or abilities

Visual search (VS) comprises a class of tasks that we typically perform several times during a day and requires intentionally scanning (with or without moving the eyes) the environment for a specific target (be it an object or a feature) among distractor stimuli. Experimental research in lab-based or real-world settings has offered insight into its underlying neurocognitive mechanisms from a nomothetic point of view. A lesser-known but rapidly growing body of quasi-experimental and correlational research has explored the link between individual differences and VS performance. This combines different research traditions and covers a wide range of individual differences in studies deploying a vast array of VS tasks. As such, it is a challenge to determine whether any associations highlighted in single studies are robust when considering the wider literature. However, clarifying such relationships systematically and comprehensively would help build more accurate models of VS, and it would highlight promising directions for future research. This systematic review provides an up to date and comprehensive synthesis of the existing literature investigating associations between common indices of performance in VS tasks and measures of individual differences mapped onto four categories of cognitive abilities (short-term working memory, fluid reasoning, visual processing and processing speed) and seven categories of traits (Big Five traits, trait anxiety and autistic traits). Consistent associations for both traits (in particular, conscientiousness, autistic traits and trait anxiety - the latter limited to emotional stimuli) and cognitive abilities (particularly visual processing) were identified. Overall, however, informativeness of future studies would benefit from checking and reporting the reliability of all measurement tools, applying multiplicity correction, using complementary techniques, study preregistration and testing why, rather than only if, a robust relation between certain individual differences and VS performance exists.

Aphantasia and hyperphantasia: exploring imagery vividness extremes

The vividness of imagery varies between individuals. However, the existence of people in whom conscious, wakeful imagery is markedly reduced, or absent entirely, was neglected by psychology until the recent coinage of 'aphantasia' to describe this phenomenon. 'Hyperphantasia' denotes the converse - imagery whose vividness rivals perceptual experience. Around 1% and 3% of the population experience extreme aphantasia and hyperphantasia, respectively. Aphantasia runs in families, often affects imagery across several sense modalities, and is variably associated with reduced autobiographical memory, face recognition difficulty, and autism. Visual dreaming is often preserved. Subtypes of extreme imagery appear to be likely but are not yet well defined. Initial results suggest that alterations in connectivity between the frontoparietal and visual networks may provide the neural substrate for visual imagery extremes.

Aphantasia and involuntary imagery

Aphantasia is a condition that is often characterized as the impaired ability to create voluntary mental images. Aphantasia is assumed to selectively affect voluntary imagery mainly because even though aphantasics report being unable to visualize something at will, many report having visual dreams. We argue that this common characterization of aphantasia is incorrect. Studies on aphantasia are often not clear about whether they are assessing voluntary or involuntary imagery, but some studies show that several forms of involuntary imagery are also affected in aphantasia (including imagery in dreams). We also raise problems for two attempts to show that involuntary images are preserved in aphantasia. In addition, we report the results of a study about afterimages in aphantasia, which suggest that these tend to be less intense in aphantasics than in controls. Involuntary imagery is often treated as a unitary kind that is either present or absent in aphantasia. We suggest that this approach is mistaken and that we should look at different types of involuntary imagery case by case. Doing so reveals no evidence of preserved involuntary imagery in aphantasia. We suggest that a broader characterization of aphantasia, as a deficit in forming mental imagery, whether voluntary or not, is more appropriate. Characterizing aphantasia as a volitional deficit is likely to lead researchers to give incorrect explanations for aphantasia, and to look for the wrong mechanisms underlying it.

No verbal overshadowing in aphantasia: The role of visual imagery for the verbal overshadowing effect

The verbal overshadowing effect refers to the phenomenon that the verbal description of a past complex stimulus impairs its subsequent recognition. Theoretical explanations range from interference between different mental representations to the activation of different processing orientations or a provoked shift in the recognition criterion. In our study, 61 participants with aphantasia (= lack of mental imagery) and 70 controls participated in a verbal overshadowing paradigm. The verbal overshadowing effect did not occur in people with aphantasia, although the effect was replicated in controls. We speculate that this is either due to the lack of visual representations in people with aphantasia that verbal descriptions could interfere with, or to the absence of a shift in processing orientation during verbalisation. To rule out criterion-based explanations, further research is needed to distinguish between discriminability and response bias in people with aphantasia. Finally, data indicated that the verbal overshadowing effect may even be reversed in individuals with aphantasia, partly due to a lower memory performance in the no verbalisation condition. Effects of further variables are discussed, such as mental strategies, memory confidence, and difficulty, quantity and quality of verbalisation.

Visual mental imagery of atypical color objects attracts attention to an imagery-matching object

Mental imagery attracts attention to imagery-matching stimuli. However, it remains unknown whether voluntarily imagined atypical color also attracts attention to a stimulus that matches the imagery when the imagined stimuli are color-diagnostic objects, which are strongly associated with typical color. This study investigated whether people can voluntarily imagine atypical colors of such objects and attend to imagery-matching stimuli. Participants in the imagery group were instructed to imagine an atypical color of the black-white objects according to the instructed color or voluntarily selected color, whereas participants in the control group were instructed to attend to the objects without any instruction of imagery. Thereafter, they detected a color target in a visual search task. Results revealed that participants in the imagery group directed attention to the imagery-matching atypical color, not to the original color of the object in the search. Meanwhile, participants in the control group did not demonstrate any attentional guidance. These results suggest that voluntarily imagining atypical color can attenuate mental representations of the original color imagery and change attention to a stimulus that matches imagery.

Diversity of aphantasia revealed by multiple assessments of visual imagery, multisensory imagery, and cognitive style

Aphantasia-a condition wherein individuals have a reduced or absent construction of voluntary visual imagery-is diagnosed using either the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ) or self-identification. However, a significant discrepancy exists between the proportions of aphantasia in the populations assessed using these two criteria. It is unclear why the reported proportions differ excessively and what percentage of people cannot form visual imagery. We investigated the replicability of the proportion of people with aphantasia using both criteria in the same population of participants. Therefore, we explored the potential causes of the discrepancy and characteristics of putative aphantasia in terms of multisensory imagery, cognitive style, and face recognition ability. First, we conducted an online sampling study (Study 1: N = 2,871) using the VVIQ, self-identification of a reduction in visual imagery, Questionnaire upon Mental Imagery (QMI), and Verbalizer-Visualizer Questionnaire (VVQ). We found that 3.7 and 12.1% fulfilled the VVIQ and self-identification criteria, respectively, roughly replicating the proportions reported in previous studies. The self-identification criterion-but not the VVIQ criterion-contains items related to face recognition; hence, we suspected that face recognition ability was factor contributing to this discrepancy and conducted another online sampling study (Study 2: N = 774). We found a significant correlation between VVIQ and face recognition ability in the control group with self-identification, but not in the group defined by low VVIQ (VVIQ ≤32). As the participants in the control group with self-identification tended to exhibit moderately high VVIQ scores but low face recognition ability, we reason that the discrepancy can be partially explained by the contamination of individual differences in face recognition ability. Additional analyses of Study 1 revealed that the aphantasia group included participants who lacked all types of sensory imagery or only visual imagery in multisensory imagery and exhibited a non-specific cognitive style. This study indicates that the VVIQ alone may be insufficient to diagnose individuals who report an inability to form visual imagery. Furthermore, we highlight the importance of multiple assessments-along with the VVIQ-to better understand the diversity of imagery in aphantasia.