CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 56Social Representations and IdentityCategorization, perception, and languageMemory Processes and Influences

The Internal Representations Questionnaire: Measuring modes of thinking

Open access
Roebuck, Hettie, Lupyan, Gary·2020·Behavior Research Methods
DOI 10.3758/s13428-020-01354-y
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Does the format in which we experience our moment-to-moment thoughts vary from person to person? Many people claim that their thinking takes place in an inner voice and that using language outside of interpersonal communication is a regular experience for them. Other people disagree. We present a novel measure, the Internal Representation Questionnaire (IRQ) designed to assess people's subjective mode of internal representations, and to quantify individual differences in "modes of thinking" along multiple factors in a single questionnaire. Exploratory factor analysis identified four factors: Internal Verbalization, Visual Imagery, Orthographic Imagery, and Representational Manipulation. All four factors were positively correlated with one another, but accounted for unique predictions. We describe the properties of the IRQ and report a test of its ability to predict patterns of interference in a speeded word-picture verification task. Taken together, the results suggest that self-reported differences in how people internally represent their thoughts relates to differences in processing familiar images and written words.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3758/s13428-020-01354-y

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Language augments and transforms cognition.

    “Interest in IS has been heightened by evidence that language augments and transforms cognition [23,49,50].”

    From Inner speech as language process and cognitive tool (2023) · cites this paper as [49]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2014). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models using lme4. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/ abs/1406.5823 · arXiv
  2. Rosseel, Y. (2012). An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48 (2), 1-36.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Roebuck, H., & Lupyan, G.
Affiliations
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
ORCID
Venue
Behavior Research Methods
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2020-03-12
Volume
52
Issue
5
Pages
2053-2070
ISSN
  • 1554-351X (ISSN-L)
  • 1554-3528
DOI
10.3758/s13428-020-01354-y
OpenAlex
W3012433702
Cited by
56
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3
FWCI
5.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Behavior Research Methods (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Representations and Identity
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
Keywords
internal representations, modes of thinking, individual differences, inner speech, verbalization, visual imagery, speeded response
MeSH terms
Humans, Imagination, Language, Surveys and Questionnaires, Thinking

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