A new study published in the journal Consciousness and Cognition shows that people with aphantasia (the inability to form mental visual images) process stories in a markedly different way than people with typical mental imagery. It became clear that I would experience it. Although anesthetists enjoy stories just as much as anyone else, they report less emotional involvement and difficulty immersing themselves in the story world.
For most people, visual imagery plays an important role in processing language, especially when reading stories. A book’s vivid descriptions evoke mental imagery that enhances the reading experience, allowing readers to visualize the setting, characters, and events as if they were watching a movie in their mind. This mental imagery not only adds richness to the storytelling experience, but also fosters emotional engagement, making the reader feel more connected to the characters and events in the story.
However, people with a rare condition called aphantasia lack the ability to visualize mental images. They cannot “see” things with their mind’s eye, even after reading vivid descriptions. Nevertheless, many anhallucinators spend large portions of their lives unaware that their cognitive experiences differ from others, as they often develop alternative ways of processing information.
Previous research has emphasized the importance of visual imagery in language comprehension and emotional engagement with stories. To better understand how aphantasia changes the experience of reading a novel, a research group based at Radboud University in the Netherlands sought to investigate this difference in depth. Researchers investigated whether people with anhallucinosis have fundamentally different reading experiences compared to people with typical visual imagery, particularly in areas such as emotional connection and immersion in the story. The purpose was to.
The research team, led by Laura Speed, recruited 47 people with aphantasia and 51 control participants with typical visual imagery. Recruitment took place online through platforms such as Reddit and Facebook, where communities dedicated to aphantasia exist. Participants were asked to read a short story titled “My Dead” by Peter Orner. This short story is a third-person narrative that explores themes of human connection and near-death experiences. The story was chosen for its descriptive content, which the researchers believed would stimulate the participants’ visual imagination.
After reading the story, participants completed several questionnaires designed to measure various aspects of their reading experience. These include their overall enjoyment of the story, their emotional involvement with the characters, and how immersed they were in the story’s world. The survey also investigated which elements of the story (landscape, character actions, dialogue, etc.) caught participants’ attention.
The results demonstrated that people with aphantasia were less likely to be emotionally involved with the story or immersed in its world. They also reported paying less attention to elements such as the story’s scenery and characters’ actions, and were less likely to empathize with or feel connected to the story’s characters.
Interestingly, despite the reduction in emotional engagement, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of their overall evaluation of the story. Afantasis and control participants rated the stories similarly in terms of how much they liked them.
Remarkably, both groups reported reading a similar number of books per year, and their genre preferences, such as fantasy and science fiction, were also similar. However, aphantasics reported consuming more fiction and nonfiction through other media such as television, movies, and video games compared to the control group. “This may reflect a preference for additional visual stimulation, which may compensate for the reduction in visual imagery,” the authors noted.
Speed et al. concluded that “aneucleinators and controls do differ in their experience of stories, supporting the role of mental imagery and simulation in story reading.” However, overall liking did not differ between the two groups, nor did they recall the story, suggesting that mental images and mental simulations are not important for understanding the story. I’m doing it. ”
A limitation of this study is that it was conducted online, which may limit generalizability to real-world reading experiences. Additionally, researchers found that aphantasia is likely to vary from person to person, and while symptoms can be global (affecting all sensory modalities), only one or some sensory modalities can be affected. Some people have aphantasia, which affects the skin, and this may have influenced the analysis.
The study, “The Role of Visual Images in Story Reading: Evidence from Aphantasia,” was authored by Laura J. Speed, Lynn S. Eekhof, and Marloes Mak.
