Department of Brain Repair & Rehabilitation, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Department of Brain Repair & Rehabilitation, Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2024 Sep;164:105819. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2024.105819. Epub 2024 Jul 18.
Within the past decade, the term "phantasia" has been increasingly used to describe the human capacity, faculty, or power of visual mental imagery, with extremes of imagery vividness characterised as "aphantasia" and "hyperphantasia". A substantial volume of empirical research addressing these constructs has now been published, including attempts to find inductive correlates of behaviourally defined aphantasia, for example using research questionnaires and functional magnetic resonance imaging. Mental imagery has long been noted as a source of conceptual confusions but no specific conceptual analysis of the new formulation of phantasia, aphantasia, and hyperphantasia has been undertaken hitherto. We offer some conceptual considerations on phantasia, noting the ongoing confusion of perceptual with mental images, and the ubiquitous use of unvalidated subjective assessment instruments such as the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ) in diagnosis and assessment, development of which was predicated on these conceptual confusions. We offer some suggestions for a conceptual framework for future empirical studies in this field, circumventing these conceptual confusions.
在过去的十年中,“phantasia”一词被越来越多地用来描述人类的视觉心理意象能力、官能或能力,其极端的意象生动性被描述为“aphantasia”和“hyperphantasia”。现在已经发表了大量针对这些结构的实证研究,包括试图找到行为定义的 aphantasia 的归纳相关性,例如使用研究问卷和功能磁共振成像。心理意象长期以来一直被认为是概念混淆的来源,但迄今为止,还没有对 phantasia、aphantasia 和 hyperphantasia 的新表述进行具体的概念分析。我们对 phantasia 提出了一些概念性的考虑,注意到知觉与心理意象之间持续存在的混淆,以及广泛使用未经验证的主观评估工具,如视觉意象生动性问卷(VVIQ),用于诊断和评估,而这些工具的开发是基于这些概念上的混淆。我们为该领域未来的实证研究提供了一个概念框架的建议,避免了这些概念上的混淆。