Aphantasia vs normal imagery: what counts as typical?
There is no single “normal” mind’s eye. Studies place imagery on one scale – and most people land in a wide middle range.
Sheet · Knowledge3 min read
Contents
In the largest prevalence study so far (Wright et al. 2024, 9,063 people), 89.7% scored in the typical range of the VVIQ, 0.9% had aphantasia, 3.3% hypophantasia and 6.1% hyperphantasia. “Normal” is therefore not one experience but a broad range – and aphantasia is one end of it.
- typical imagery
- 89.7%
- VVIQ 33–74 (Wright et al. 2024)
- aphantasia
- 0.9%
- VVIQ 16 (Wright et al. 2024)
- median VVIQ score
- 57
- middle half 49–65 (scale 16–80)
What “normal” means for mental imagery
The questionnaire most widely used in research is the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ) by David Marks (1973): you picture 16 things and rate each image from 1 to 5. The sum runs from 16 to 80. Studies sort people by this sum into four ranges; “typical imagery” spans 33 to 74 points – most of the scale.
In Wright et al. (2024), the median VVIQ score was 57, and the middle half of all participants scored between 49 and 65. So two people with “normal” imagery can still describe their images quite differently.
Aphantasia0.9%
Hypophantasia3.3%
Typical imagery89.7%
Hyperphantasia6.1%
Aphantasia, hypophantasia, typical imagery and hyperphantasia compared
| Range | VVIQ score | Share (Wright et al. 2024) | Average rating per item (1–5) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aphantasia | 16 | 0.9% | 1 on every item – “No image at all, you only “know” that you are thinking of the object” |
| Hypophantasia | 17–32 | 3.3% | 1.1–2.0 – at best “Vague and dim” |
| Typical imagery | 33–74 | 89.7% | 2.1–4.6 |
| Hyperphantasia | 75–80 | 6.1% | 4.7–5.0 – close to “Perfectly clear and as vivid as normal vision” |
Shares from Wright et al. (2024), 9,063 participants. The right column is plain arithmetic – the score divided by 16 items – with the wording of Marks’ rating scale.
Other definitions give other figures. Dance et al. (2022) reported 3.9% whose imagery was entirely absent or markedly impaired; Zeman (2024) puts profound aphantasia (VVIQ 16) at about 1% and imagery that is at best “vague and dim” (VVIQ ≤ 32) at 2–6%. The figures differ because the cut-off differs, not because the measurements disagree.
Is aphantasia normal?
In the strict sense it is rare – 0.9% in Wright et al. (2024). But it is not a disease: it describes one end of a natural range, just as hyperphantasia describes the other. The VVIQ was not built to find disorders, as Marks writes himself:
Neither the original 16-item VVIQ nor the extended version, VVIQ-2, are intended to be used as a screening tool for clinical/neurological conditions. Any score including the minimum and maximum is a measure of an individual difference in a distribution. To assume otherwise would be an illegitimate abuse of this instrument.
How to find out where you are
- Apple testOne question, a first impression – no score. Try the apple test
- VST-16Our self-test with 16 questions in four everyday scenes, following the method of the VVIQ. Take the test
- Original VVIQThe 16 items by Marks (1973) in the English original, with the ranges above. Take the original VVIQ
Frequently asked questions
What is a normal VVIQ score?
Studies call 33 to 74 points typical. In Wright et al. (2024) the median was 57; half of all participants scored between 49 and 65.
Is it normal not to see images in your mind?
It is uncommon: 0.9% had the lowest possible score in Wright et al. (2024), 3.3% had weak imagery (VVIQ 17–32). It is not a disease and no score is a diagnosis.
How do I know whether my imagery is typical?
A test with many items gives you a sum you can place on the same scale – the VST-16 or the original VVIQ. The apple test gives a first impression only.
Sources
- Wright, D. J., Scott, M. W., Kraeutner, S. N. et al. (2024). An international estimate of the prevalence of differing visual imagery abilities. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1454107. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1454107
- Dance, C. J., Ipser, A. & Simner, J. (2022). The prevalence of aphantasia (imagery weakness) in the general population. Consciousness and Cognition, 97, 103243. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2021.103243
- Zeman, A. (2024). Aphantasia and hyperphantasia: exploring imagery vividness extremes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 28(5), 467–480. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2024.02.007
- Marks, D. F. (1973). Visual imagery differences in the recall of pictures. British Journal of Psychology, 64(1), 17–24. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1973.tb01322.x
- Marks, D. F. Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ) and VVIQ-2: https://davidfmarks.net/vividness-of-visual-imagery-questionnaire-vviq/ and https://davidfmarks.net/vividness-of-visual-imagery-questionnaire-2/ (retrieved 2026-09-28)
Last reviewed:
Responsible: Onur Cirakoglu, founder of headon
Read on
Where are you on the scale?
The VST-16 places you on the same scale – about 5 minutes, no account, your answers stay on your device.