ArticleCortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior2019
Double-blind study of visual imagery in grapheme-color synesthesia.
Article in Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Addressing demand artifacts in psychological research (and beyond).Behavior research methods · 2026Review
- Sharing the load: How a personally coloured calculator for grapheme-colour synaesthetes can reduce processing costs.PloS one · 2021Article
- Stochastic resonance model of synaesthesia.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019Review
- Exploring the relationship between grapheme colour-picking consistency and mental imagery.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Synesthesia is an atypical perceptual phenomenon that has been associated with generalized differences in other cognitive and perceptual domains. Given similarities in the qualitative nature of synesthetic experiences to visual imagery perceptions, several studies have sought to examine whether synesthetes demonstrate increased visual imagery abilities. Using subjective imagery questionnaires, some studies have identified superior imaging abilities in synesthetes, while others have not. However, because most research on synesthesia uses un-blinded group membership prior to data collection, such methods for studying group differences may be prone to participant and experimenter biases (e.g., a motivated synesthete may rate themselves as having stronger visual imagery abilities due to their own bias and perceived experimenter expectations). To address this issue, we demonstrate the feasibility of double-blind designs in synesthesia research, applied here to examine differences in subjectively reported levels of imagery usage and intensity. Prior to identifying synesthetes' and non-synesthetes' group membership (in order to eliminate the potential for bias), subjects completed two common measures of visual imagery experiences. Using this approach, we replicated findings of greater visual imagery usage in synesthetes on the Spontaneous Use of Imagery Scale (SUIS) measure, but not of enhanced imagery abilities on the standardized Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ) measure. The present study strengthens prior evidence that synesthesia is associated with heightened visual imagery and demonstrates the utility of double-blind designs in order to limit biases and promote further replicability of other findings in research on synesthesia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.