Umeå University's logo

While previous research on episodic memory vividness aims at measuring episodic memory, such cognitive tasks also involve visual mental imagery since vividness is primarily a property of visual mental imagery. Literature also shows that subjective measurements of visual mental imagery (e.g., the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire; VVIQ) are confounded by demand characteristic effects, either by participant response biases or instructional cues. Investigating such claims is most suitable in those who report an absence of visual mental imagery, that is, in aphantasia. Therefore, this study examines whether subjective vividness ratings are interpreted differently between a “visualize” and a “recollect” version of the VVIQ. One hundred and thirty-nine participants filled out online either one of the versions of the questionnaire, which also included an additional manipulation on demand characteristics (i.e., instructional cues on what alleged previous research found on response patterns). Eighty-nine participants self-described with aphantasia. Results showed that irrespective of self-describing with aphantasia or not, participants scored comparably on the two versions of the questionnaire (with aphantasic participants scoring overall lower than control participants), favouring the interpretation that episodic memory vividness involves visual mental imagery. Furthermore, no demand characteristic effects were found in those self-describing with aphantasia, whereas controls’ questionnaire scores were affected only negatively by the employed instructional cues. Different interpretations of such results are discussed, highlighting the idea that it is a difficult methodological exercise to discern the two theoretical constructs: visual mental imagery and episodic memory.