Visual imagery typically enables us to see absent items in the mind's eye. It plays a role in memory, day-dreaming and creativity. Since coining the terms aphantasia and hyperphantasia to describe the absence and abundance of visual imagery, we have been contacted by many thousands of people with extreme imagery abilities. Questionnaire data from 2000 participants with aphantasia and 200 with hyperphantasia indicate that aphantasia is associated with scientific and mathematical occupations, whereas hyperphantasia is associated with 'creative' professions. Participants with aphantasia report an elevated rate of difficulty with face recognition and autobiographical memory, whereas participants with hyperphantasia report an elevated rate of synaesthesia. Around half those with aphantasia describe an absence of wakeful imagery in allsense modalities, while a majority dream visually. Aphantasia appears to run within families more often than would be expected by chance. Aphantasia and hyperphantasia appear to be widespread but neglected features of human experience with informative psychological associations.
It has been demonstrated that when people free classify stimuli presented simultaneously in an array, they have a preference to categorize by a single dimension. However, when people are encouraged to categorize items sequentially, they sort by "family resemblance," grouping by overall similarity. The present studies extended this research, producing 3 main findings. First, the sequential procedure introduced by G. Regehr and L. R. Brooks (1995) does not always produce a preference for family resemblance sorts. Second, sort strategy in a sequential procedure is sensitive to subtle variations in stimulus properties. Third, spatially separable stimuli evoked more family resemblance sons than stimuli of greater spatial integration. It is suggested that the family resemblance sorting observed is due to an analytic strategy.
The processes of overall similarity sorting were investigated in 5 free classification experiments. Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated that increasing time pressure can reduce the likelihood of overall similarity categorization. Experiment 3 showed that a concurrent load also reduced overall similarity sorting. These findings suggest that overall similarity sorting can be a time-consuming analytic process. Such results appear contrary to the idea that overall similarity is a nonanalytic process (e.g., T. B. Ward, 1983) but are in line with F. N. Milton and A. J. Wills's (2004) dimensional summation hypothesis and with the stochastic sampling assumptions of the extended generalized context model (K. Lamberts, 2000). Experiments 4 and 5 demonstrated that the relationship between stimulus presentation time and overall similarity sorting is nonmonotonic, and the shape of the function is consistent with the idea that the three aforementioned processes operate over different parts of the time course.
Although Galton recognized in the 1880s that some individuals lack visual imagery, this phenomenon was mostly neglected over the following century. We recently coined the terms “aphantasia” and “hyperphantasia” to describe visual imagery vividness extremes, unlocking a sustained surge of public interest. Aphantasia is associated with subjective impairment of face recognition and autobiographical memory. Here we report the first systematic, wide-ranging neuropsychological and brain imaging study of people with aphantasia (n = 24), hyperphantasia (n = 25), and midrange imagery vividness (n = 20). Despite equivalent performance on standard memory tests, marked group differences were measured in autobiographical memory and imagination, participants with hyperphantasia outperforming controls who outperformed participants with aphantasia. Face recognition difficulties and autistic spectrum traits were reported more commonly in aphantasia. The Revised NEO Personality Inventory highlighted reduced extraversion in the aphantasia group and increased openness in the hyperphantasia group. Resting state fMRI revealed stronger connectivity between prefrontal cortices and the visual network among hyperphantasic than aphantasic participants. In an active fMRI paradigm, there was greater anterior parietal activation among hyperphantasic and control than aphantasic participants when comparing visualization of famous faces and places with perception. These behavioral and neural signatures of visual imagery vividness extremes validate and illuminate this significant but neglected dimension of individual difference.
Long-term Forgetting (ALF), in which memory for verbal and non-verbal material is 25 retained normally over short delays but fades at an unusually rapid rate over days to 26weeks. This study addresses three questions about ALF in TEA: i) whether real-life 27 events undergo ALF in a similar fashion to laboratory-based stimuli; ii) whether ALF can 28 be detected within 24 hours; iii) whether procedural memories are susceptible to ALF. 29Eleven patients with TEA and eleven matched healthy controls wore a novel, automatic 30 camera, SenseCam, while visiting a local attraction. Memory for images of events was 31 assessed on the same day and after delays of one day, one week, and three weeks. 32Forgetting of real-life events was compared with forgetting of a word list and with 33 performance on a procedural memory task. On the day of their excursion, patients and 34 controls recalled similar numbers of primary events, associated secondary details 35 (contiguous events, thoughts and sensory information) and items from the word list. In 36 contrast, patients showed ALF for primary events over three weeks, with ALF for 37 contiguous events, thoughts and words over the first day. Retention on the procedural 38 memory task was normal over three weeks. The results indicate that accelerated 39 forgetting in TEA: i) affects memory for real-life events as well as laboratory stimuli; ii) 40 is maximal over the first day; and iii) is specific to declarative memories. 41 42
Using the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire we selected 14 high-scoring and 15 low-scoring healthy participants from an initial sample of 111 undergraduates. The two groups were matched on measures of age, IQ, memory and mood but differed significantly in imagery vividness. We used fMRI to examine brain activation while participants looked at, or later imagined, famous faces and famous buildings. Group comparison revealed that the low-vividness group activated a more widespread set of brain regions while visualising than the high-vividness group. Parametric analysis of brain activation in relation to imagery vividness across the entire group of participants revealed distinct patterns of positive and negative correlation. In particular, several posterior cortical regions show a positive correlation with imagery vividness: regions of the fusiform gyrus, posterior cingulate and parahippocampal gyri (BAs 19, 29, 31 and 36) displayed exclusively positive correlations. By contrast several frontal regions including parts of anterior cingulate cortex (BA 24) and inferior frontal gyrus (BAs 44 and 47), as well as the insula (BA 13), auditory cortex (BA 41) and early visual cortices (BAs 17 and 18) displayed exclusively negative correlations. We discuss these results in relation to a previous, functional imaging study of a clinical case of 'blind imagination', and to the existing literature on the functional imaging correlates of imagery vividness and related phenomena in visual and other domains.
Our thanks go to Angus B. Inkster for his help coding the verbal reports.TRAINING TYPE AND CATEGORIZATION. AbstractThe effects of two different types of training on rule-based and information-integration category learning were investigated in two experiments. In observational training, a category label is presented, followed by an example of that category and the participant's response. In feedback training, the stimulus is presented, the participant assigns it to a category and then receives feedback about the accuracy of that decision. Ashby, Maddox, and Bohil (2002) reported that feedback training was superior to observational training when learning information-integration category structures, but that training type had little effect on the acquisition of rule-based category structures. These results were argued to support the COVIS dual-process account of category learning. However, a number of non-essential differences between their rule-based and information-integration conditions complicate interpretation of these findings. Experiment 1 controlled, between category structures, for participant error rates, category separation, and the number of stimulus dimensions relevant to the categorization. Under these more controlled conditions, rule-based and information-integration category structures both benefitted from feedback training to a similar degree. Experiment 2 maintained this difference in training type when learning a rule-based category that had otherwise been matched, in terms of category overlap and overall performance, with the rule-based categories used in Ashby et al.These results indicate that differences in dimensionality between the category structures in Ashby et al. is a more likely explanation for the interaction between training type and category structure than the dual-system explanation they offered.KEYWORDS: COVIS, categorization, implicit, explicit, feedback.TRAINING TYPE AND CATEGORIZATION. 3Ashby and Maddox (2011) stated that many researchers now assume multiple systems are involved in category learning. To the extent that this claim is accurate, it is down in no small part to the behavioral dissociations reported by Ashby, Maddox and colleagues. These studies tend to find a differential effect of a manipulation on the learning of two types of category structure: rule-based and information-integration. argue that these dissociations are predicted by one particular dual-system model of category learning, COVIS (COmpetition between Verbal and Implicit Systems; Ashby, Alfonso-Reese, Turken, & Waldron, 1998;Ashby, Paul, & Maddox, 2011), which assumes the existence of two competing systems of category learning. The strength of the case for COVIS is, of course, not a function of the number of dissociations that have been reported, but rather of the number that prove to be reliable and valid. Indeed, there is a growing body of work that casts doubt on the validity or interpretation of a high proportion of these dissociations (e.g. Dunn, Newell, & Kalish, 2012;Newell, Dunn, & Kalish, 2010;...
Does cognition begin with an undifferentiated stimulus whole, which can be divided into distinct attributes if time and cognitive resources allow (Differentiation Theory)? Or does it begin with the attributes, which are combined if time and cognitive resources allow (Combination Theory)?Across psychology, use of the terms analytic and non-analytic imply that Differentiation Theory is correct -if cognition begins with the attributes, then synthesis, rather than analysis, is the more appropriate chemical analogy. We re-examined four classic studies of the effects of time pressure, incidental training, and concurrent load on classification and category learning (Kemler Nelson, 1984;Smith & Kemler Nelson, 1984;Smith & Shapiro, 1989;Ward, 1983). These studies are typically interpreted as supporting Differentiation Theory over Combination Theory, while more recent work in classification (Milton, Longmore & Wills, 2008, et seq.) supports the opposite conclusion. Across seven experiments, replication and re-analysis of the four classic studies revealed that they do not support Differentiation Theory over Combination Theory -two experiments support Combination Theory over Differentiation Theory, and the remainder are compatible with both accounts. We conclude that Combination Theory provides a parsimonious account of both classic and more recent work in this area. The presented data do not require Differentiation Theory, nor a Combination-Differentiation hybrid account.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.