Cited by 130Memory Processes and InfluencesIdentity, Memory, and TherapyCognitive Functions and Memory

Memories with a blind mind: Remembering the past and imagining the future with aphantasia

Dawes, Alexei J., Keogh, Rebecca, Robuck, Sarah, Pearson, Joel·2022·Cognition

Abstract

Our capacity to re-experience the past and simulate the future is thought to depend heavily on visual imagery, which allows us to construct complex sensory representations in the absence of sensory stimulation. There are large individual differences in visual imagery ability, but their impact on autobiographical memory and future prospection remains poorly understood. Research in this field assumes the normative use of visual imagery as a cognitive tool to simulate the past and future, however some individuals lack the ability to visualise altogether (a condition termed "aphantasia"). Aphantasia represents a rare and naturally occurring knock-out model for examining the role of visual imagery in episodic memory recall. Here, we assessed individuals with aphantasia on an adapted form of the Autobiographical Interview, a behavioural measure of the specificity and richness of episodic details underpinning the memory of events. Aphantasic participants generated significantly fewer episodic details than controls for both past and future events. This effect was most pronounced for novel future events, driven by selective reductions in visual detail retrieval, accompanied by comparatively reduced ratings of the phenomenological richness of simulated events, and paralleled by quantitative linguistic markers of reduced perceptual language use in aphantasic participants compared to those with visual imagery. Our findings represent the first systematic evidence (using combined objective…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105192

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dawes, A. J., Keogh, R., Robuck, S., & Pearson, J.
Affiliations
UNSW Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Dawes, Alexei J.
Venue
Cognition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-10
Volume
227
Pages
105192
ISSN
0010-0277 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4283390325
Cited by
130
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 44 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 2
FWCI
11.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Australian Research Council (DP140101560)
  • ARC
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1046198, APP1085404, APP1049596)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Identity, Memory, and Therapy
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
aphantasia, visual imagery, autobiographical memory, episodic memory, mental simulation, autobiographical interviews, individual differences
MeSH terms
Forecasting, Humans, Imagination, Individuality, Mental Recall, Memory, Episodic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review