Assessing aphantasia prevalence and the relation of self-reported imagery abilities and memory task performance
Abstract
Aphantasia is the experience of having little to no visual imagery. We assessed the prevalence rate of aphantasia in 5,010 people from the general population of adults in the United States through self-report and responses to two visual imagery scales. The self-reported prevalence rate of aphantasia was 8.9% in this sample. However, not all participants who reported themselves as aphantasic showed low-imagery profiles on the questionnaire scales, and scale prevalence was much lower (1.5%). Self-reported aphantasic individuals reported lower dream frequencies and self-talk and showed poorer memory performance compared to individuals who reported average and high mental imagery. Self-reported aphantasic individuals showed a greater preference for written instruction compared to video instruction for learning a hypothetical new task although there were differences for men and women in this regard. Categorizing aphantasia using a scale measure and relying on self-identification may provide a more consistent picture of who lacks visual imagery.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
2-6% of the population experiences imagery that is at best 'vague and dim', with VVIQ scores of 32/80 or less.
“whereas 2–6% experience imagery that is at best 'vague and dim', and have VVIQ scores of 32/80 or less”
From Aphantasia and hyperphantasia: exploring imagery vividness extremes (2024) · cites this paper as [33]
Around 1% of the population experiences profound aphantasia, with the lowest possible VVIQ score (16/80).
“These studies suggest that ~1% of the population experiences profound aphantasia and have the lowest possible VVIQ score (16/80)”
From Aphantasia and hyperphantasia: exploring imagery vividness extremes (2024) · cites this paper as [33]
Subsequent reports have borne out that people with aphantasia dream visually.
“This observation has been borne out by subsequent reports [3”
From Aphantasia and hyperphantasia: exploring imagery vividness extremes (2024) · cites this paper as [33]
Of 5010 participants recruited online, 5.9% scored 75-80/80 on the VVIQ.
“Of 5010 participants recruited online, 5.9% scored 75–80/80”
From Aphantasia and hyperphantasia: exploring imagery vividness extremes (2024) · cites this paper as [33]
On standard experimental measures of memory, people with aphantasia perform normally or show at most mild to moderate impairment.
“On a range of standard experimental measures of memory (short- and long-term, verbal and visual), people with aphantasia perform normally or show, at most, mild to moderate impairment”
From Aphantasia and hyperphantasia: exploring imagery vividness extremes (2024) · cites this paper as [33]
Cites
The blind mind: No sensory visual imagery in aphantasia
Keogh, R., & Pearson, J. (2018) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2017.10.012 · Cited by 352 · see citing works
A cognitive profile of multi-sensory imagery, memory and dreaming in aphantasia
Dawes, A. J., Keogh, R., Andrillon, T., & Pearson, J. (2020) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-65705-7 · Cited by 322 · see citing works
Bainbridge, W. A., Pounder, Z., Eardley, A. F., & Baker, C. I. (2021) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2020.11.014 · Cited by 195 · see citing works
The prevalence of aphantasia (imagery weakness) in the general population
Dance, C. J., Ipser, A., & Simner, J. (2022) · Consciousness and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.concog.2021.103243 · Cited by 167 · see citing works
Redefining Visual Working Memory: A Cognitive-Strategy, Brain-Region Approach
Pearson, J., & Keogh, R. (2019) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0963721419835210 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Exceptional visuospatial imagery in schizophrenia; implications for madness and creativity
Benson, T. L., & Park, S. (2013) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00756 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Aphantasia and hyperphantasia: exploring imagery vividness extremes
Zeman, A. (2024) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2024.02.007 · Cited by 148 · see citing works
“Evidence for the in fl uence of age on imagery vividness extremes is con fl icting [33,37].”
BackgroundResultInfluentialTononi, G., Boly, M., & Cirelli, C. (2024) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2024.04.011 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
- Authors
- Beran, M. J., James, B. T., French, K., Haseltine, E. L., & Kleider-Offutt, H. M.
- Affiliations
- Georgia State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Beran, Michael J.
- Venue
- Consciousness and Cognition
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2023-08
- Volume
- 113
- Pages
- 103548
- ISSN
- 1053-8100 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4384103894
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 4.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Consciousness and Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Georgia State University
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Keywords
- aphantasia, visual imagery, prevalence, memory performance, dream frequency, self-talk, sex differences, general adult population
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Cognition, Female, Humans, Imagination, Male, Task Performance and Analysis, Visual Perception, Prevalence, Self Report
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