3 ms·
Tests like your first question are often poor indicators because people without an ability will develop other skills or methods to compensate. We don't just wa
by ken 7y ago
Tests like your first question are often poor indicators because people without an ability will develop other skills or methods to compensate. We don't just walk through life not knowing anything that's going on around us.
After being asked "How many X are there?" a few times, for example, we figure out that counting and remembering minutiae is important.
I once read an article about aphantasia which showed a bunch of blocks, and later showed different orientations of blocks and asked if they were the same or not. If you could, the article concluded that you had good ability to visually rotate a 3D object in your mind. I don't know if I do or not. That sounds difficult. But I could say right away which shapes sounded the same.
- naavis 7y agoI think the more important question was how they came up with the number. If you lack the ability to go through your apartment in your mind and count the windows AND do not happen to remember the number outright, it might indicate something like aphantasia.
- ken 7y agoAbsolutely -- but realize at that point you're asking a brain for an explanation of how it operates. Self-reported data in social science is not the most robust. Especially in the situation where you're trying to figure out if someone has constructed their own methods to mimic 'normal' ones. The more effective and internalized the method, the less likely the person is going to be able to identify and report it. Just look at all the people who are saying they're surprised to learn that "picture it in your mind" is meant to be literal. Their mimicry is so effective they can't recognize it in themselves.