It is estimated that up to one person out of fifty "suffers" from aphantasia – meaning that they cannot evoke visual imagery in their minds. Abilities such as perception, thinking, creativity, memory, etc., remain intact in "aphantasics," and the condition itself brings them no difficulties – it is simply considered a norm. It will probably seem incomprehensible to you that when trying to recall their childhood bedroom in their mind, some people see absolutely nothing or only very blurry outlines, yet they can describe the room to you with all its details. However, you might belong to the two percent of the population for whom it will be a surprising revelation that most people are capable of detailed visualization, that their imagery breathes with vivid details not very distant from real perceptions…
It is perhaps somewhat strange to begin an article by prompting the reader to close their eyes – yet that is precisely what I will ask of you in a moment. As you observe your eyelids from the inside, try to imagine, for instance, the following picturesque scenery: mist over a lake, a setting sun, a herd of wildlife leaping over the horizon. Three, two, one – see you in the next paragraph.
A similar task would have been assigned to you two centuries ago only by Francis Galton. This Englishman had many research interests, but until recently attention was paid only to the less successful ones – his name is primarily associated with the idea of eugenics. Fortunately, not all of his contributions were depressingly perverse. Galton was the first to collect the experiences of people lacking the capacity for visual imagination. In 1880, he published his research on interpersonal differences in the ability of visual imagery. He first interviewed his scientific colleagues, and gradually expanded the research to a wider group of participants. They were asked to imagine, for example, their desk or another object, and then describe how bright or lit (the category of illumination), sharp (definition), and colorful (colouring) this imagery was. So, how would you evaluate your own imagery?
In Galton's research, those who described their imagery as "corresponding to reality in all respects," visible "just as well, with all details, exactly as when I see the object before me," "completely clean and distinct," placed closest to the top of the spectrum. Participants with an average level of visual imagination ability saw their desks "quite distinctly," the image was "defined, but not sharply; less bright than in reality," or they were able to visually imagine specific objects on the desk in detail one by one, but never the whole picture with all objects at once. At the very end of the continuum, we find those who described their imagery as "misty, incomparable to a real image in terms of brightness. Lacking sharpness with light spots, highly incomplete," with perceptions "in all respects so misty, vague, and transient that I doubt whether they can be called imagery at all."
These findings floated unnoticed in a sea of theories until recently. Only the 1970s saw disputes over whether imagination is exclusively imagery-based, or whether we code mental images only using statements about relationships between concepts (so-called propositions). Research on imagery focused at that time exclusively on patients with brain damage or individuals with mental illness. Only recently, however, has the lighthouse beam of scientific attention shifted outside the field of pathology, when a team of scientists led by Professor Adam Zeman entered the scene.
It is precisely their 2015 study that brings a name to the hitherto insufficiently explored psychological phenomenon of aphantasia. It is a compound of the Greek phantasia (imagination), defined by Aristotle as the way images appear to us in the mind, and the prefix a- (without).
The first modernly described case of aphantasia was patient MX, who suddenly lost the ability of visual imagination following a heart operation, although he presented no neurological or psychiatric problems. The sixty-five-year-old surveyor had recently retired and felt this as a loss – "from time to time I miss the ability to see," he told the authors of the study, when performing a detailed description of prominent locations in Edinburgh, he could not understand how he could remember the landmarks yet not see them in his mind, as he had been used to his entire life. Following a popular article reporting the outcome of the study, its authors began to hear from a multitude of people claiming they had experience with exactly what MX was describing… except that they did not acquire aphantasia as a result of an operation, injury, or anything else – this condition was the norm for them from birth! Zeman and his team described this condition as congenital aphantasia.
The researchers evaluated self-diagnosed aphantasia in participants using a questionnaire, the task of which included several activities focused on imagination, followed by a subjective rating of its quality. The questionnaire contained situations such as "imagine a relative or friend whom you see frequently" or "visualize a sunrise." The image that did (not) emerge in the participants' minds was to be carefully evaluated on a five-point scale from "perfectly clear and as vivid as when looking for real" to "no image at all, I only know that I am thinking of the object."
How does a person find out at all that their way of thinking, more specifically imagination, fundamentally differs from the majority experience? We notice an unusual gait or perhaps speech difficulties without any issue and immediately... however, reaching the realization that most people, when imagining a friend's face, do not experience just visual blackness, vague concepts, and a mere feeling of something like "I am thinking about this person right now," is not so easy. Some notice their distinctness through conversations with friends, others learn about the existence of different modes of visual imagination from articles on the Internet or perhaps during attempts at meditation. The shocking realization only "overheats the brain" for a moment for some, while others feel isolated and sad that they are missing out on something as wonderful as a vivid visual imagination. Artists in particular might view this as extremely crucial; it seems intuitive that visual imagination is closely linked to creativity and artistic skills – but the good news is, this does not hold true. "Aphantasics" are still capable of imagination, it just occurs in a different, hitherto unexplained way.
Not much is known yet about the origin of aphantasia – research into this phenomenon is highly complex (internal experience is always subjective, difficult to measure and compare) and only in its infancy. There is talk of differences in the structures of the frontal and parietal lobes, which participate in the capacity for visualization – insufficient feedback from these brain parts might prevent the activation of the visual cortex, and a person thus loses the ability to form images in the mind. A deficit in visual memory likely plays a role as well. Some scientists claim that besides brain anomalies, psychological reasons can also stand behind the occurrence of aphantasia – depressive, dissociative, or anxiety disorders are frequently associated with aphantasia. However, we will have to wait for more precise findings.
It is also not clear whether aphantasia is permanent. The hypothesis of a lifelong stability of this condition was recently challenged by the case of a man who managed to shift from the category of absolute aphantasia into a very weak ability of visualization – namely thanks to the use of the hallucinogen Ayahuasca. Within a shamanic ritual with this psychedelic substance, the man was able to (at least partially) process his childhood trauma, and subsequently reacquired the ability of visual imagination (albeit very weak). Perhaps, therefore, he was not born with aphantasia, but it appeared in him as a consequence of mental suffering, hence through the path of coping with psychological difficulties, an overall improvement could occur. On the other hand, a case of a person experimenting with hallucinogens has also been described, in whom no improvement/"cure" of aphantasia occurred – it seems that, at least, congenital aphantasia might be irreversible.
At this point, however, it is too early to draw any conclusions. Perhaps we will see each other again in a few years for an article shedding much more light. How are you doing with imagination? What do you see when you close your eyes? Write to us in the comments!
Sources:
de Vito, S. & Bartolomeo, P. - Refusing to imagine? On the possibility of psychogenic aphantasia. A commentary on Zeman et al. - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279634813_Refusing_to_imagine_On_the_possibility_of_psychogenic_aphantasia_A_commentary_on_Zeman_et_al_2015
Gallagher, J. - Aphantasia: Ex-Pixar chief Ed Catmull says 'my mind's eye is blind'. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-47830256
Green, C. D. - Statistics of Mental Imagery. https://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Galton/imagery.htm
Keogh, R., Pearson J. - The blind mind: No sensory imagery in aphantasia. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314945328_The_blind_mind_No_sensory_imagery_in_aphantasia
Luke, D. - Reply to “Ayahuasca turned on my mind’s eye”: A case of acquired versus congenital aphantasia, as evidenced with DMT use?. https://akjournals.com/view/journals/2054/2/2/article-p97.xml
Rafael G. dos Santos, Scotty Enyart , José Carlos Bouso, Òscar Pares, Jaime E. C. Hallak – „Ayahuasca turned on my mind’s eye”: Enhanced visual imagery after ayahuasca intake in a man with “blind imagination” (aphantasia) - https://akjournals.com/view/journals/2054/2/2/article-p74.xml
Wikisofia.cz - Představivost, druhy představ and jejich vlastnosti. Teorie představivosti. Fantazie. https://wikisofia.cz/wiki/P%C5%99edstavivost,_druhy_p%C5%99edstav_a_jejich_vlastnosti._Teorie_p%C5%99edstavivosti._Fantazie.
Zeman, A. Z. J., Della Sala, S., Torrens, L. A., Gountouna, V.-E., McGonigle, D. J., & Logie, R. H. - Loss of imagery phenomenology with intact visuo-spatial task performance: A case of ‘blind imagination’. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0028393209003418
Zeman, A., Dewar, M., Salla, S. D. - Lives without imagery – congenital aphantasia. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26115582/
Zimmer, C. - Picture This? Some Just Can’t. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/science/aphantasia-minds-eye-blind.html
