Visual aphantasia, characterised by the absence or near-absence of voluntary visual mental imagery, has attracted increasing interest in recent years. However, the conceptualisation, measurement, and lived experience of the phenomenon remain underexplored, particularly from a clinically relevant perspective. This thesis addresses these gaps through two complementary studies examining both theoretical and experiential aspects of aphantasia. A narrative literature review synthesised existing research on visual aphantasia through a conceptually oriented lens relevant to clinical psychology. The review traced the historical development of visual imagery research and critically examined contemporary debates regarding the definition and classification of aphantasia, including distinctions between congenital and acquired forms. Empirical findings relating to neural mechanisms, cognitive functioning, and mental health associations were reviewed, alongside current approaches to measurement and their limitations. Clinical implications were considered, particularly in relation to assessment, formulation, and the adaptation of imagery-based therapeutic interventions. An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis explored the lived experience of acquired aphantasia through interviews with ten adults who had lost visual mental imagery. Four group experiential themes were identified: Realised losses, Striving for understanding, Living Without a Remembered Visual Past, and What now?. These themes reflected experiences of cognitive and identity-related change, attempts to make sense of the loss, and processes of adaptation and adjustment. These studies advance conceptual, empirical, and clinical understanding of aphantasia and highlight the importance of recognising individual differences in imagery when considering psychological theory, assessment, and therapeutic practice. Thesis embargoed until 31st July 2031
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Anne-Marie Browne (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: