To ask you all about your minds eye?

[GrampieRabbit]

I've had a really long running thread about this a few years ago, but I wanted to revisit it - firstly because I find it really interesting, and secondly for dissertation ideas

So I don't have a minds eye. I couldn't picture a tree in my head, or a house, or my baby's face. I couldn't tell you 100% which colour my room is painted in, or what colour my dads car is. I literally think in words.

This means I have trouble with directions, even to places I've been several times. My memory is absolutely terrible - my long term memory is practically non existent.

Does anyone else experience similar? There's a test you can take here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-340390544*

I know I want to do my dissertation on this condition. I'm so fascinated by it, and have been ever since I realised it was actually a thing (on Mumsnet!)

But I want it to be on aphantasia AND something. I was thinking aphantasia and memory.

But I remember that last time I had a thread on this, Mumsnetters with aphantasia (and myself) read extraordinarily quickly, and always had done from a young age. So I was thinking maybe I could test the strength of participant's minds eyes (couldn't work out the grammar for that phrase!), and then timing them whilst they read something. But might have to include some comprehension questions I guess to check they've actually read it.

Then I started thinking about the fact that people said they had always read quickly - so is this something we're born with? Could I figure out a way to test kids for it? Maybe a little too complicated?

My dissertation proposal's due in a couple of days. It can be really vague - I could probably just get away with writing 'aphantasia', but I want to get paired with the most appropriate supervisor, hence the forward thinking. Am waiting on DD to go to bed then I'll research some more, but these are just some initial ideas.

Please, please share your experiences of aphantasia and thoughts on interesting dissertation ideas

Working memory provides an ‘inner voice’ and an ‘inner eye’. The ‘inner eye’, or visuo-spatial sketchpad is more developed in some people, the ‘inner voice’, or phonological loop, in others – and some people are more balanced between the two modes.

I remember learning about this actually. Will definitely touch on this in my study, thank you!

I don't tend to imagine touch - I might imagine standing in a cold stream, but I don't feel the cold that makes you catch your breath, or the feeling of it almost burning till your feet acclimatise and start going numb. I know how it would feel, but I can't feel it in the same way I see it, and I assume for aphantasic people, images are like that - they know it, but don't see it.

And I'm the exact opposite to you. I can remember exactly how it feels to stroke my dog, to touch something, a smell. I I remember a smell or taste. I can smell it again, it's here. Voices, too, but not that well.

Faces, no.
But I have been thinking about this thread since I posted last night and
while I cannot remember a face I can recognise someone I met a long time ago but I cannot see them if you asked me, or describe them. My worst nightmare is would be if I had to be a police witness. I couldn't do to.

I think the drawing / visualisation angle is interesting. I can draw pretty much anything from memory very accurately, my husband can neither draw or visualise things. Sorry if you've already answered this but us it experimental or a review you're doing? I would also look at handedness as either a factor or confound, there's loads to discuss there. I'm left handed and there seems to be a relationship between spatial awareness, creativity and handedness. I'm guessing that being able to conjure up images at will is a plausible link.

36/40 hyperphantasia
My visual memory is better than words. Words are very fluid and tend to slip away. Remembering places & people, I can see and feel (sense) the memory.
My dreams are very vivid and painting & drawing come easy and give great pleasure (I get a kick from the aesthetic experience.)
I tend to stick to audio books.

Another Aphantasia type poster who finds this a bit depressing!

Still, at least I have vivid dreams...

Does anyone else find that in their images they can broadly see the shapes but not what's inside?

Not sure if this relevant but I tend to watch one episode of something and from then on I tend to only listen as I can visualise the people and situations from then on. So, I'll be doing stuff on the computer with the programme playing in a different wiondow and I just flick over from time to time especially if it all goes quiet! I find listening to music too distracting though .

I'm an author so I deal in words..

but I see in pictures. So when I'm writing a novel it's like I'm seeing the film of the book playing in front of my eyes and just writing down what happens. I'm not good at visualising faces, but I can picture scenes and places extremely clearly (although, oddly, when people are asking about places I've written, I always picture the reverse image to how they 'see' it).

I read very fast and always have done (two or more books a day, when I've time for reading).

I'm also wondering about the length of time holding an image. I can definitely see things in my minds eye, but it's very fleeting. I couldn't possibly ^draw an image from It as it would have gone by the time I've grasped the pencil, but could from memory. Images flicker into my mind, they do'nt stay there for long like some other posters seem to.

Very fast reader, very visual 'mind's eye'. I think almost more in picture and metaphor, especially about very abstract things then struggle to translate to words! So would be interested in the comparison teststo see if they show anything interesting!

Have good memory for directions, partly visualising last time been there. Real bugger if eg night time vs day time or if road layout changed between times. Only time it got futzed up was when I tried cannabis in Amsterdam! However once spotted a tower could navigate back...

I cant picture anything. Even when i close my eyes i just see coloured spots. Its actually really annoying

In your experiments how do you plan to factor out education, amount of reading the individual does, nature v nurture?

It does sound from your initial post, that you already lean towards a theory where folk who process thought in this way (and that would be a tough one in itself to define) have a "natural" inclination or aptitude for reading, or non visual learning. It would be better if you could, given the huge variables, tighten up your proposal and rethink to remove or minimise your understandable bias and personal involvement.

Wow, I always knew I couldn't visualise anything bit I didn't realise it's actually a 'thing'!

Sorry I haven't read all of the thread yet. I will do so later but for now was desperate to touch base and reply!

I do find it upsetting. My OH tells me off for taking too many photos of our children, but I did it because I rely on that entirely for remembering what they look like. Without it I cannot remember AT ALL and I often get very upset that I can't even picture what they were like when they were babies. It's like there's a huge void in my brain where memories of my children should be, yet when I try to explain this to people they thing I'm mad, making it up or must have some MH issue making me so depressed I've totally forgotten my children's childhoods!!! So it does sadly have a huge impact on our day to day life.

Thank you for this thread. This is both incredibly upsetting and relieving at the same time; at least I can justify my photography hobby to my OH now! I wonder if other aphantasia sufferers are also reliant so much on photos/into photography for the same reason?

So yes, it turns out I obviously suffer from aphantasia. I read quickly and have vivid dreams BUT cannot ever 'see' any detail and some things in my dream I am always 'blind' to, so for example I never ever see faces (they are just blank space) and when I go to focus in on anything it gets more and more blurry until it becomes invisible.

I'm actually a professional artist and specialise in photorealism so my work is incredibly detailed, but I have to work entirely by relying on photographs or drawing/painting objects that are right in front of me (and I do mean right in front, so that the image and my work are side by side. I can't translate an image to canvas if I can't 'instantly' do it, seemingly bypassing something in my brain!). What's interesting though is that I absolutely cannot draw even the most simple comic or cartoon-type image without having one in front of me that I can copy, and I mean even the most basic smiley face (round face, two dots for eyes, curved line for a smile)!! If you saw my usual work you would honestly think me saying that I can't even draw a bloody emoticon is just absolutely absurd, but it's true! I never even knew why until I read your opening post, but it honestly explains everything!! I've been dealing with this all of my life and could never put my finger on what was wrong, but now I know I'm honestly sat here in tears in both relief and profound sadness! I have always wanted to be a Disney-type illustrator or write and illustrate my own children's books but because I can't even imagine my own characters or settings it's something I've never been able to pursue. I knew there was something wrong with me. :( I literally have to make my own little Frankensteins from existing images and try to change them enough to make brand new characters otherwise, for me, it's impossible. My OH, on the other hand, is absolutely crap at drawing but can picture and draw cartoon characters amazingly well!

It's also always amazed me how people can give detailed descriptions of criminals to police sketch artists. Seriously, wtaf?! How on earth to they manage to picture a person like a photograph or remember any of that detail?!? I couldn't even give the most basic description of my own family! I guess I have my answer now!

On saying all that I perhaps seem to go against the grain somewhat for someone with aphantasia. I have a brilliant sense of direction and special awareness. I was born full term, am not on the autistic spectrum, don't have dyslexia, etc. However, and I really don't understand this at all, I have an absolutely dreadful auditory memory but a fantastic visual memory... So for instance, if I'm driving somewhere unfamiliar that I've only been to once before I definitely wouldn't be able to picture any of the journey in my mind BUT when presented with an image, such as a junction coming into view, I instantly remember it and know which way to go. I've been like that my whole life though so things like diagrams I remember really well but I can't picture them in my head, so when presented with the same diagram unlabeled I would easily be able to fill in any missing words and parts of the diagram, but if you didn't give me any cues (so for instance you just gave me a blank sheet of paper) I wouldn't be able to draw it or even recall what it looks like, IYSWIM. So weirdly, despite being an aphantasia sufferer, I do still seem to process visual information more effectively than any other type of processing (semantic, auditory, etc) I just can't 'see' that image in my mind, even though that information is definitely in my brain somewhere!!! If anyone develops some kind of cure, a way to unlock that information visually, I'd definitely be interested!

Anyway, this does genuinely interest me so if I can do anything to help with your research I would absolutely be happy to take part in any research trials, etc. Do feel free to PM me.

Good luck with your work!

I do the narration too. Sometimes words get said aloud which can be embarrassing

Agree with Birdchange that you need to narrow down and define questions more clearly and in a way that excludes your own bias. Research that intends to prove your own experience is not research.

For the record, I have:

*very fast reading pace

but then I am a researching academic who has been taught to read in several foreign languages, so that might just have some relevance

*strong tendency to visualise familiar people in my mind

but difficulty recognising less familiar people, and in putting names to faces of semi-familiar people (like former students or colleagues)

*poor spatial awareness and inability to think in 3D (probably related to lazy eye)

but strong tendency to retain visual and sensory memory of familiar places

*difficulty in measuring distances and speed of vehicles (again, related to lazy eye)

but good at navigating a boat (the movement of waves & wind seem to make it easier for me)

*able to call up image of familiar place and walk round it at will

but completely incapable of drawing a recognisable picture of the simplest object

• able to recall voices, accents and music (including complicated opera scores) at will- can amuse myself for hours on end re-hearing plays or music I listened to years ago

but unable to imitate voices or accents

This thread has reminded me the about post-mortem investigations carried out on Einstein’s brain to try to determine the seat of his genius.

He was famously a late talker and words did not feature strongly when he was contemplating his theories. According to his own account, her relied strongly on visual imagery to work on his ideas, which he later ‘translated’ into words.

Studies – described here by Stephen Pinker – show that one of the striking features of his brain was enlarged parietal lobes, associated with spatial reasoning, in both right and left hemispheres. It has been speculated that the left parietal lobe ‘crowded out’ some of the nearby regions associated with language tasks, perhaps explaining why he was so late in learning to talk. Pinker suggests that different mental functions might 'compete for real estate as they develop in the cerebral cortex’.

All this prompts the notion that there can sometimes be a trade-off when it comes to verbal and visual abilities. Given that Einstein with his vivid picture thinking was a late talker, I wonder if those with aphantasia are more likely to be early talkers?

I scored as having hyperfantasia simply because all the questions about people were formulated the way they were, about familiar people. If you had included one question about less familiar people or places, my score would have dropped right down.

I struggle to find my way back to my seat in a restaurant after I've been to the bar, but can still "see" the foyer of the swimming baths I used to attend as a child 45 years ago. Not because of any emotional significance, either; simply because I saw it frequently and regularly.

I also think any investigation needs to be careful to distinguish between "sometimes a trade-off" and the assumption that there will be a trade-off.

The same thing is often said of babies: that they develop quickly in one area and not in another. But from our toddler group I can certainly remember some babies (not mine!) who were remarkably early in both physical and verbal development, as well as some others who were not early in either.

This is scary! I can't imagine being without my minds eye.

I always wondered if others could imagine touch (I can). I can feel something in my hand if I try to touch-imagine for example.

I narrate my life too - out loud if I'm alone. I sort of mutter as I go about my daily business and everyone thinks I'm slightly bonkers.

I can imagine smells too, is this normal? If someone said 'imagine the smell of new baked bread' my mouth starts to water and I can 'feel' that yeasty bready smell. Is this part of the same condition? I can also remember smells of different perfumes, which makes buying perfume much easier!

Did the test and have hyperphantasia.

Is this why people watch porn? I've always wondered why they don't just imagine what they want to see!

I narrate my life also and would like to do so in public if it was socially acceptable!

I have only skimmed this thread, but this is so interesting, I am marking my place so I can find it again to read more.

I scored 29/40 on that test, though I think it should be lower as a lot of the answers I felt should be somewhere between vague and dim and moderate.

I can draw and visualise things, but I can't draw from an image in my head, and the images are often fuzzy, as if out of focus.

Which is odd really because a lot of the time when I try to recall where I left something, or some important information, I recall it visually.

I can picture faces and things but its mostly more an outline and lacks detail. Apart from a few things that can be pretty vivid. I have really vivid dreams and excellent spatial awareness/reading ability/ability to find my way anywhere.

Most of the time my minds eye is black and white, and I have to really work at filling in the colour.

So I would love to know if it is something that can be improved if that initial ability is there. Interesting.

Am I correct to assume this falls under a Psychology degree?

It does seem as if it's impossible for any particular brain to be optimised for all conceivable tasks.

An interesting example –

There was a ‘feral’ child called Genie who was kept in social isolation and consequently did not learn to talk. She had a very spikey IQ profile, scoring very low in subtests requiring verbal skills - but also obtained the highest ever recorded scores for subtests measuring spatial awareness.

*In your experiments how do you plan to factor out education, amount of reading the individual does, nature v nurture?

It does sound from your initial post, that you already lean towards a theory where folk who process thought in this way (and that would be a tough one in itself to define) have a "natural" inclination or aptitude for reading, or non visual learning. It would be better if you could, given the huge variables, tighten up your proposal and rethink to remove or minimise your understandable bias and personal involvement.*

If you see my later post, I've decided my hypotheses will be around visual and word recall instead. Definitely will consider education and things as a confounding variable. And I'll consider my bias and personal involvement. As I said, I'm literally at the beginning right now and this is the first experiment I've ever carried out on my own so hoping my supervisor can give me some guidance

All the very clever people critiquing, please have a look at my later post detailing hypotheses and see if you think they're any better? Thank you!