Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40493310›Full record

ArticleMemory & cognition2025

Dissociating voluntary mental imagery and mental simulation: Evidence from aphantasia.

Laura J Speed, Emma M E Geraerds, Ken McRae

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Memory & cognition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Laura J SpeedCentre for Language Studies, Radboud University, Nijmegen, Netherlands. laura.speed@ru.nl.
Emma M E GeraerdsCentre for Language Studies, Radboud University, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Ken McRaeDepartment of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intentional visual imagery is a component of numerous aspects of cognition. Related to visual imagery, mental simulation plays a role in language comprehension: modality-specific regions of the brain are activated as an implicit part of people understanding language. The degree of overlap between the processes underlying conscious, voluntary visual imagery versus less conscious, more automatic mental simulation is unclear. We investigated this issue by having aphantasics (people who are unable to experience conscious voluntary visual imagery) and control participants perform a property verification task in which they were asked whether a property is a physical part of an object (e.g., is mane a physical part of a lion?). We manipulated the false trials so that the two words either were associated (semantically related) but did not form an object-part combination (monkey-banana), or were not associated (apple-cloud). Solomon and Barsalou (Memory & Cognition, 32, 244-259, 2004) demonstrated that word association influenced responses when the words in the false trials were not associated, whereas when they were associated, perceptual measures most strongly influenced the results, indicating mental simulation. In the present study, control participants and aphantasics demonstrated similar evidence of the use of both mental simulation and word association when verifying whether the words formed an object-part combination. These results suggest that visual imagery and mental simulation are at least somewhat separable cognitive processes.

Indexed as

ImaginationVisual PerceptionAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedYoung AdultAphantasiaEmbodimentMental imageryMental simulation

Identifiers

PMID40493310
PMCPMC12696087

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.