Factorial validity of imagery measures

McLemore, Clinton W.

doi:10.1016/0005-7967(76)90086-3

Cited by 25 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, this study was intended to identify the conditions under which vivid imagers would and would not outperform nonvivid imagers on social memory tasks. In light of past research indicating that vividness of imagery scores do not predict ability to generate images (e.g., McKelvie & Rohrberg, 1978;McLemore, 1976;Richardson, 1977), we reasoned that the exceptional social memories of vivid imagers displayed in Investigation 1 must have reflected their facility in using visual stimuli in encoding and/ or retrieving factual information about the interviewee. From this we deduced that it should be possible to handicap vivid imagers by not allowing them to see the interview respondent.…”

Section: Investigationmentioning

confidence: 81%

Why never forgetting a face matters: Visual imagery and social memory.

Swann¹,

Miller²

1982

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research tested the hypothesis that individuals who tend to form vivid visual images of others (vivid imagers) have more accurate social memories than those who form relatively nonvivid visual images of others (nonvivid imagers). In the first investigation, vivid imagers outperformed nonvivid imagers in remembering details concerning the attitudes, activities, and life history of a woman whom they observed being interviewed. Investigation 2 provided more definitive evidence for the link between visual imagery and social memory by demonstrating that vivid imagers had more accurate memories after seeing an interviewee answer questions, whereas seeing the interviewee had no impact on the memories of nonvivid imagers. The discussion considers the impact that imagery processes may have on a variety of social thought processes.

show abstract

Section: Investigationmentioning

confidence: 81%

Why never forgetting a face matters: Visual imagery and social memory.

Swann¹,

Miller²

1982

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Correlational studies have produced somewhat inconsistent results, with correlation coefficients varying from insignificant to high [60,61]. However, in factor analytic studies, these questionnaires tend to load on a single factor [3][4][5][6][7]. These studies suggest that these three dimensions are related but perhaps tap different aspects of the subjective sense of imagery ability.…”

Section: Subjective Imagery Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Visual Imagery Ability: A Review

McAvinue

Robertson

2007

Imagination, Cognition and Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The internal nature of visual imagery makes the measurement of visual imagery ability a difficult task. In this review, we describe and evaluate the available measures of visual imagery ability. Several questionnaires of vividness, control, and preference have received favorable psychometric evaluations but these were not created on the basis of a theoretical analysis of imagery ability. Recent development of questionnaires has taken account of theoretical advances. Future research should continue in this vein. Objective tests of spatial ability may not be as appropriate as theory-driven visual imagery tests, as measures of visual imagery ability. The latter should be standardized. The well-known finding of a lack of relationship between subjective and objective imagery measures has been challenged by recent findings. Before this relationship can be fully examined, current measurement should be improved.

show abstract

“…Hall and Martin (1997) reported a positive correlation of .54 between scores on the Movement Imagery Questionnaire and the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire. Studies examining the relationship between different measures of visual imagery have repeatedly indicated that subjective and objective measures are unrelated to each other, with each kind of measure tending to load upon separate factors during factor analysis (DiVesta, Ingersoll, & Sunshine, 1971;McLemore, 1976;Poltrock & Brown, 1984;Lequerica, Rapport, Axelrod, Telmet, & Whitman, 2002;Burton & Fogarty, 2003).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between Visual and Motor Imagery

McAvinue

Robertson

2007

Percept Mot Skills

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationship between visual and motor imagery was investigated by administering a battery of visual and motor imagery measures to a sample of 101 men (n=49) and women (n=52), who ranged in age from 18 to 59 (M=34.5, SD= 12.6). A principal components analysis applied to the correlation matrix indicated four underlying components, which explained 62.9% of the variance. The components were named Implicit Visual Imagery Ability, Self-report of Visual and Motor Imagery, Implicit Motor Imagery Ability, and Explicit Motor Imagery Ability. These results suggested a dissociation between visual and motor imagery although visual and motor imagery were associated as self-reports and there were correlations among particular measures.

show abstract

Factorial validity of imagery measures

Cited by 25 publications

References 17 publications

Why never forgetting a face matters: Visual imagery and social memory.

Why never forgetting a face matters: Visual imagery and social memory.

Measuring Visual Imagery Ability: A Review

Relationship between Visual and Motor Imagery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About