Vividness of mental imagery reflects a broad range of internally generated visual experiences
D. Samuel Schwarzkopf, Xinran A Yu, Ecem Altan, Loren N Bouyer, Blake W. Saurels, Elizabeth Pellicano, Derek H. Arnold
bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) October 2, 2025 preprint DOI: 10.1101/2025.09.30.679629 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Survey |
|---|---|
| Keywords | Mental image Trait Creative visualization Visual perception Mental rotation Cognitive psychology |
| Key findings | Simple vividness ratings can replace protracted questionnaires and are closely linked to the experience of seeing mental images or projecting them externally. |
Abstract
Abstract Research on mental visual imagery typically relies on vividness ratings. However, vividness is ill-defined as it lacks an objective reference. Here, we present survey results that suggest vividness is nevertheless a robust measure. It explains individual differences of a broad range of subjective experiences, from the detail of mental imagery, the propensity to report having other internally generated visual experiences, and the vividness of visual dreams. Critically, simple vividness ratings can replace the protracted questionnaires commonly used for this purpose and reduce methodological issues with these instruments. We further find that vividness is closely linked with the experience of “seeing” mental images or projecting them into the external world. People who report seeing mental images with their eyes shut are also more likely to experience externally projected imagery. Nevertheless, many people report having mental depictions but without seeing. Overall, our results indicate we should redefine visual aphantasia to distinguish individuals with faint or unseen visual images from those completely lacking a pictorial representation.