How People Estimate the Prevalence of Aphantasia and Hyperphantasia in the Population

We examined how people estimate the prevalence of aphantasia (extreme lack of visual imagery) and hyperphantasia (extreme abundance of visual imagery) in the population and how their own imagery and verbal skills predict these estimations. Participants read extreme imagery descriptions and evaluated the percentage of individuals within a population to whom they apply. Participants also completed questionnaires assessing their own object and spatial imagery and verbal skills, and imagery vividness. Participants estimated the prevalence of hyperphantasia as about 53%, notably higher than the estimated prevalence of 32% for aphantasia. These estimates were considerably higher than the actual rates reported in the literature (approximately 3% for hyperphantasia and 1% for aphantasia). At the same time, participants’ own vividness ratings indicated low rates of extreme imagery, consistent with other studies. Higher self-reported object imagery (but not spatial imagery or verbal skills) predicted greater overestimation of hyperphantasia, but only for self-estimated object imagery skills, not for vividness ratings. Additionally, females overestimated the frequency of imagery extremes more than males, particularly for aphantasia. Our work contributes to understanding of public perceptions of visual-spatial cognitive diversity and suggests that one's own cognitive skills may influence perceptions of the prevalence of rare cognitive traits in others. We discuss the potential role of cognitive biases in perception of imagery variability in population and in self-evaluated abilities. Additionally, by considering spatial imagery vividness, which is often overlooked in aphantasia research, our work opens the door for future studies on spatial aphantasia and its potential prevalence.