Contents
Introduction
Mental imagery encompasses the ability to form and manipulate sensory representations in the absence of external stimuli. This cognitive process allows individuals to visualize, hear, or otherwise experience sensations internally. Among the various types of mental imagery—visual, auditory, tactile, and others—visual imagery has been the most extensively studied.
Visual imagery enables individuals to recreate and interact with visual stimuli in their minds, playing a crucial role in tasks ranging from everyday problem-solving to enhancing performance in specialized fields. This exploration will delve into visual imagery, its classical research, including the landmark study by Shepard and Metzler on mental rotation, and the ongoing debate between analog and propositional codes in visual imagery. Additionally, it will touch upon auditory imagery, highlighting recent findings and existing research gaps.
Mental Imagery
Mental imagery refers to the mental representation of stimuli when those stimuli are not physically present. This includes visual, auditory, tactile, and other sensory images. Mental imagery relies on top-down processing, meaning that it utilizes information stored in long-term memory to recreate an internal experience of previously perceived objects or sounds. These images can serve various purposes, from everyday tasks like locating objects to enhancing professional performance in fields such as aviation and psychology
Visual Imagery
Visual imagery is a type of mental imagery that involves creating and experiencing visual perceptions in the mind without the presence of actual visual stimuli. It allows individuals to mentally picture objects, scenes, or events as if they were seen through the eyes, even when the objects or scenes are not physically present.
For example- Imagine you are visualizing your favorite vacation spot. You can see the details of the landscape, such as the lush green trees, the clear blue sky, and the sparkling water of the lake. You might even recall the specific colors and shapes of the objects around you. This mental recreation of the visual experience without actually seeing it is an example of visual imagery.
Classical Research on Visual Imagery
Visual imagery has been one of the most studied aspects of mental imagery, largely focusing on how mental images are used in tasks like visual search, memory recall, and mental rotation. Historically, the use of imagery in cognitive psychology declined during the behaviorist period (1920-1960), as it was considered too subjective to measure empirically. However, the cognitive revolution brought renewed interest, and it has since remained a prominent topic in cognitive psychology.
Mental Rotation- Shepard and Metzler’s Study (1971)
Mental rotation refers to the cognitive process of imagining an object turning or rotating in your mind, similar to how one might physically rotate an object. It is a specific type of mental imagery, often used to study how people visualize spatial relationships between objects.
One of the most famous studies on mental rotation was conducted by Shepard and Metzler. They presented participants with pairs of three-dimensional line drawings, asking them to determine if the objects were identical but rotated or if they were different. Participants had to mentally rotate the objects to determine this, and their reaction times were recorded as the dependent variable. The researchers discovered that participants took longer to mentally rotate the objects by larger angles, which indicated that mental images are manipulated similarly to physical objects. For instance, rotating an object by 180 degrees took longer than rotating it by 90 degrees.
Visual Rotation Task
Reaction Time and Mental Rotation
The research showed a linear relationship between the angle of rotation and the time taken to make a decision. This suggests that people mentally rotate objects in a continuous, step-by-step manner, similar to how physical objects are rotated. Shepard and Metzler’s findings have been replicated using various stimuli, including letters of the alphabet and other geometrical shapes, confirming that larger angles of rotation generally result in longer reaction times.
Further Findings
- Handedness and Mental Rotation– Studies have shown that right-handed individuals are faster at recognizing right-handed images compared to left-handed images, while left-handed individuals perform equally well with both. Both groups, however, recognize upright images faster than upside-down ones.
- Age and Mental Rotation– Younger individuals typically perform mental rotation tasks faster than older individuals. However, other imagery tasks, like direction sense or scanning mental images, do not show as strong a correlation with age.
- Deaf Individuals– Research found that deaf individuals fluent in American Sign Language (ASL) are particularly skilled at mental rotation, likely because they frequently engage in mentally rotating hand signs to match perspectives.
Cognitive Neuroscience Insights
Neuroscience research, using techniques like PET scans, has shown that the mental rotation task activates the motor cortex, particularly when individuals have previous physical experience rotating objects. For instance, participants who physically rotated an object showed motor cortex activity during mental rotation, while those who only watched an object being rotated did not show the same activation. Additionally, the wording of instructions in these tasks affects brain activation patterns. When individuals imagine rotating themselves rather than the object, different brain regions, such as the left temporal lobe, are activated.
Practical Applications
Research into mental rotation has practical applications, particularly in stroke rehabilitation. By engaging the motor cortex through mental rotation exercises, stroke patients can stimulate motor recovery, which helps them regain motor control faster.
This body of research demonstrates how mental imagery and physical actions share cognitive mechanisms and how mental exercises can affect brain activity similarly to physical exercises.
Analog vs. Propositional Code in Visual Imagery
A significant debate in cognitive psychology revolves around the format of mental images (Matlin & Farmer, 2016). The analog code theory suggests that mental images are stored in a way that resembles perception, with visual characteristics like shapes and distances preserved. The propositional code theory argues that mental images are stored in a language-like, abstract form, with information represented descriptively rather than visually.
Analog-Code Approach
The analog-code approach posits that mental images are represented in the brain in a way that closely resembles the actual physical objects. This approach emphasizes that mental imagery works similarly to perception. When you form a mental image of an object, such as a triangle, the relationships between its features (e.g., the angles and lines) are preserved in a way that mimics the actual object. The term “analog” refers to this resemblance, suggesting an analogy between the mental image and the real object.
Evidence for Analog Code
Research, particularly by Shepard and Metzler, supports the analog-code perspective. Their studies on mental rotation showed that people mentally rotate objects similarly to how they would physically rotate them. The time it takes to mentally rotate an object increases with the degree of rotation, which suggests that mental imagery preserves visual-spatial information, much like perception does.
Neuroscientific Support
Neuroimaging studies also provide strong evidence for the analog approach. For example, tasks involving visual imagery activate the primary visual cortex, the same area of the brain that processes actual visual stimuli. This overlap suggests that mental images are processed similarly to real images. Additionally, individuals with damage to the visual cortex, such as those with prosopagnosia (an inability to recognize faces), also have difficulties creating mental images of faces, further supporting the analog perspective.
The Propositional-Code Approach
In contrast, the propositional-code approach argues that mental images are not stored in a visual or spatial format but rather in an abstract, language-like form. According to this theory, mental imagery is more related to language than perception. When you imagine a triangle, for instance, your brain doesn’t generate a picture of the triangle but rather a description of its features—e.g., “three connected lines forming angles.”
Propositional Code Theory
One of the key proponents of the propositional approach, Zenon Pylyshyn, argued that while people experience mental images, these images are not central to how we store or manipulate information. He suggested that representing all the mental images we have would require a vast amount of cognitive storage, making it impractical. Instead, propositional codes allow for more abstract, condensed representations. For example, rather than storing an image of a triangle, the brain might store a description like “three lines meeting at angles.”
Evidence for Propositional Code
Studies by Reed (1974) provided evidence for the propositional approach. When participants were asked to identify specific visual patterns (e.g., a parallelogram within the Star of David), they were correct only slightly more than half the time. Reed concluded that participants likely stored a verbal description of the figure (e.g., “two triangles superimposed”), which lacked the spatial detail needed to recognize the embedded shapes. These findings suggest that in some cases, people rely more on propositional (language-like) descriptions than on analog (picture-like) representations.
Neuroimaging and Cognitive Findings
Neuroimaging studies further reveal interesting patterns. As previously mentioned, tasks requiring visual imagery activate similar regions of the brain as visual perception, including the primary visual cortex. This finding supports the analog perspective, as it shows a strong connection between mental imagery and perceptual processing. However, other cognitive tasks, such as solving complex puzzles or interpreting ambiguous images, may be more reliant on propositional codes.
For instance, Chambers and Reisberg (1985) conducted experiments involving ambiguous figures (e.g., the duck-rabbit image). Participants were asked to visualize the ambiguous figure and then reinterpret it mentally, without looking at the physical image. Most participants struggled with this task, indicating that their mental images were less flexible than actual perceptual images. However, when they were allowed to draw the figure, they could reinterpret it easily. This research suggests that mental images might be stored in a more rigid, language-like format (propositional code) rather than a flexible, picture-like format (analog code).
Ambiguous Figures and Visual Imagery
One challenge for the analog-code theory is how it accounts for ambiguous figures—images that can be interpreted in more than one way. For example, the famous duck-rabbit image can be seen as either a duck or a rabbit, depending on the interpretation. When participants try to visualize the ambiguous figure after seeing it, they often find it difficult to switch between interpretations. However, when shown the actual image, they can switch interpretations more easily. This suggests that mental imagery may not be as flexible as perception, which supports the idea that ambiguous images might be stored and manipulated using a propositional code rather than an analog code.
Factors Influencing Visual Imagery
Several factors affect the accuracy and speed of mental imagery, including the distance between imagined objects, the complexity of the images, and the influence of external stimuli.
- Distance Effects– Distance between imagined objects significantly impacts mental imagery. In studies by Stephen Kosslyn, it was found that people take longer to mentally “travel” between two widely separated points in their imagined space compared to closely situated points. This suggests that mental imagery behaves similarly to physical perception; the greater the distance, the more cognitive effort is required to traverse it. For example, if you imagine moving from one landmark to another in an imagined city, the farther apart these landmarks are, the longer it will take for you to mentally “move” between them. This phenomenon aligns with Kosslyn’s analog-code theory, where mental imagery functions much like perception, following similar spatial rules.
- Shape Effect– Shape also plays a crucial role in mental imagery. People process imagined shapes much like they process real ones, which holds true for both simple and complex shapes. When individuals are asked to make decisions about imagined shapes, such as comparing two geometric figures or identifying the outline of U.S. states, they approach these tasks in the same way as they would with real visual stimuli. For instance, if you are asked to mentally compare the shapes of two states like Texas and California, the time it takes to make a judgment is similar to the time it would take if you were comparing physical representations of these states. This similarity in cognitive processing between real and imagined shapes highlights the analog nature of visual imagery.
- Interference and Mental Imagery– Visual imagery can interfere with actual visual perception, particularly when both tasks compete for cognitive resources in the same sensory modality. Studies by Segal and Fusella (1970) demonstrated that when participants were asked to imagine a visual stimulus, their ability to detect an actual physical stimulus in the same sensory mode—such as sight—was impaired. For example, trying to maintain a mental image of a friend’s face while reading a page is difficult because both activities draw from the same visual processing system. This phenomenon suggests that the brain cannot effectively manage both imagined and perceived images simultaneously, leading to interference in one or both tasks. The competition for cognitive resources highlights the shared pathways between mental imagery and actual perception.
Factors Influencing Visual Imagery
Auditory Image
Auditory imagery refers to the mental representation of sounds in the absence of the actual auditory stimulus. For instance, one might vividly imagine the sound of a close friend’s laughter or mentally replay the opening notes of a favorite song. This ability to “hear” sounds in the mind extends to environmental sounds, such as the whining noise of a car with a dying battery or the distinctive sounds made by various animals. Despite the potential richness of auditory imagery, psychologists have lamented the lack of research in this area.
For example, Hubbard (2010) reviewed the field and noted that although imagery research gained momentum in the late 1960s and 1970s, auditory forms of imagery have received relatively little attention. Furthermore, earlier studies that claimed to provide evidence of auditory imagery often had methodological issues, leading to inconclusive findings.
Research Gaps
Researchers have also explored whether auditory imagery is less vivid than visual imagery. A study by Rubin and Berentsen (2009) asked participants in the United States and Denmark to recall a past event and rate the vividness of their imagery. In both countries, participants reported that their visual imagery was more vivid than their auditory imagery. This discrepancy in vividness is one reason why research on auditory imagery remains limited, although it still puzzles some psychologists. Despite this, recent research has begun to examine specific characteristics of auditory imagery, such as loudness, pitch, and timbre.
Auditory Imagery and Pitch
One important feature of auditory imagery is pitch, which can be arranged on a scale from low to high. Intons-Peterson et al. (1992) conducted a classic study on pitch imagery, asking participants to mentally “travel” between auditory stimuli with different pitches. For example, participants first created an auditory image of a cat purring and then imagined traveling to a higher-pitched sound, like a slamming door. The results showed that participants needed about 4 seconds to travel this short auditory distance. When traveling to a sound with a much higher pitch, such as a police siren, participants needed about 6 seconds. This suggests that the mental distance between imagined pitches corresponds to the actual tonal differences between the sounds.
Auditory Imagery and Timbre
Another critical aspect of auditory imagery is timbre, which refers to the quality or “color” of a sound. For instance, the same melody—such as “Happy Birthday”—played on a flute and a trumpet will have different timbres even if the pitches are identical.
Halpern et al. (2004) conducted a study to explore imagery for timbre, focusing on participants who had at least five years of formal musical training. The researchers assessed participants’ ability to imagine the timbre of eight different musical instruments. In both perceptual and imagined conditions, participants were asked to rate the similarity of timbres between instrument pairs. The results showed a high correlation between the perception and imagery conditions, indicating that the mental representation of an imagined instrument’s timbre closely resembles its actual sound. This study highlights the richness of auditory imagery and suggests that much remains to be explored in terms of how we mentally represent sounds.
Conclusion
The study of mental imagery reveals its profound impact on cognitive processes and practical applications. Visual imagery, with its roots in classical research and contemporary findings, underscores how mental representations mirror perceptual experiences. The debate between analog and propositional codes continues to shape our understanding of how mental images are stored and manipulated. Research into auditory imagery, though less extensive, demonstrates its potential and the need for further exploration. Together, these insights contribute to a broader understanding of how mental imagery functions and its implications for both everyday life and specialized practices, such as rehabilitation and cognitive training.
References
Chambers, D., & Reisberg, D. (1985). Can visual imagery facilitate visual perception? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11(4), 317-330.
Galotti, K. M. (2018). Cognitive psychology in and out of the laboratory. Thomson Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
Glicksohn, J. (1994). The rotation heuristic and the perception of geographic location. Cultural Psychology, 2(4), 317–332.
Halpern, A. R., & Zatorre, R. J. (2004). When that tune runs through your head: A review of the auditory imagery literature. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11(4), 663–674.
Hubbard, T. L. (2010). Auditory imagery: Empirical findings, theoretical implications, and clinical relevance. Psychological Bulletin, 136(2), 233–252.
Intons-Peterson, M. J., & Thompson, W. A. (1992). Auditory imagery and the mental distance between auditory stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(3), 846–856.
Kosslyn, S. M. (1994). Image and brain: The resolution of the imagery debate. Harvard University Press.
Matlin, M. W., & Farmer, J. A. (2016). Cognitive psychology. John Wiley & Sons.
Moar, K., & Bower, G. H. (1983). The representation of spatial information in memory: Evidence from studies on cognitive maps. Memory & Cognition, 11(2), 189–198.
Peterson, L. R., & Peterson, M. J. (1959). Short-term retention of individual verbal items. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58(3), 193-198.
Reed, S. K. (1974). Patterns of visual recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 6(3), 407-428.
Rubin, D. C., & Berentsen, K. (2009). The vividness of auditory imagery: A comparison of visual and auditory imagery in two cultures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(3), 306–319.
Segal, S. K., & Fusella, J. C. (1970). The effect of visual imagery on visual and auditory signal detection. Perception & Psychophysics, 8(4), 266-272.
Shepard, R. N., & Metzler, J. (1971). Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 171(3972), 701-703.
Zenon, P. Y. (2005). Imagery and perception: The role of the motor system. Cognitive Science, 29(5), 769-784.