Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Do sequence-space synaesthetes have better spatial imagery skills? Yes, but there are individual differences

  • Research Report
  • Published:
Cognitive Processing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

People with sequence-space synaesthesia perceive sequences (e.g. numbers, months, letters) as spatially extended forms. Here, we ask whether sequence-space synaesthetes have advantages in visuo-spatial skills such as mental rotation. Previous studies addressing this question have produced mixed results with some showing mental rotation advantages (Simner et al. in Cortex 45:1246–1260, 2009; Brang et al. in Cogn Process, 2013), but one that did not (Rizza and Price in Cogn Process 13:299–303, 2012). We tested this hypothesis again with a new group of sequence-space synaesthetes, and we also tested a range of individual differences that might have caused this conflict across previous studies. Specifically, we tested: years of education, visual imagery ability, nature of forms (2D or 3D representation of sequences), number of forms (e.g. for months, days, numbers), and tendency to project sequences into external space versus the mind’s eye. We found yet again that synaesthetes had enhanced abilities in mental rotation compared to controls, but that one individual difference in synaesthetes (the ability to project forms into space) was especially linked to performance. We also found that synaesthetes self-reported higher visual imagery than controls (Price in Cortex 45:1229–1245, 2009; Mann et al. in Conscious Cognit 18:619–627, 2009; Rizza and Price 2012). Overall, our data support previous studies showing superior imagery reports (Price 2009) and mental rotation (Simner et al. 2009; Brang et al. 2013) in sequence-space synaesthetes, and we suggest that one previous failure to replicate (Rizza and Price 2012) might be explained by individual differences among synaesthetes recruited for testing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Notes

  1. There is no evidence of systematic difference across previous studies in the presence of 2D/3D forms, and the use of 2D/3D rotation tasks: Simner et al. (2009) and Rizza and Price (2012) both used a 3D object rotation task whereas Brang et al. (2013) used a 2D grapheme rotation. No information regarding spatial dimensionality of forms was reported in either Simner et al. (2009) or Rizza and Price (2012), although Brang et al. concluded that within their sample of synaesthetes (N = 117), there was nearly a 50:50 split between those that experienced their forms as 2D or 3D.

  2. Our participants saw seven additional questions which we henceforth classify as fillers. These items did not make it into our final analysis because we wished to balance the number of associator versus projector items, and we also required all final questions to be unambiguously within one category or the other. The seven filler items did not fit these criteria.

  3. Our study also included a second task of mental rotation, but this time with simpler materials that were 2D rather than 3D (i.e., eight 2D polygons). These materials were not originally designed to distinguish between groups of participants (see Cooper 1975) and ultimately proved too simple to assess for superior performance in our synaesthete because controls were already at ceiling. The mean accuracy of controls (93.9 %; SD = 11.1 %) was around 10 % points higher than in the 3D rotation task, and this made it effectively impossible for our 15 synaesthetes to score significantly higher. In the spirit of full disclosure we report here our participants’ mean accuracy (synaesthetes M = 95.1 %; SD = 3.6) and RTs (synaesthetes M = 4.37 s, SD = 2.6; controls M = 4.17 s, SD = 4.9).

References

  • Asher JE, Lamb JA, Brocklebank D, Cazier JB, Maestrini E, Addis L, Sen M, Baron-Cohen S, Monaco AP (2009) A whole-genome scan and fine-mapping linkage study of auditory-visual synesthesia reveals evidence of linkage to chromosomes 2q24, 5q33, 6p12, and 12p12. Am J Hum Genet 84(2):279–285

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blajenkova O, Kozhevnikov M, Motes MA (2006) Object-spatial imagery: a new self-report imagery questionnaire. Appl Cogn Psychol 20(2):239–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borst G, Kosslyn SM (2010) Individual differences in spatial mental imagery. Q J Exp Psychol 63(10):2031–2050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brang D, Teuscher U, Ramachandran VS, Coulson S (2010) Temporal sequences, synesthetic mappings, and cultural biases: the geography of time. Conscious Cognit 19:311–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brang D, Miller LE, McQuire M, Ramachandran VS, Coulson S (2013) Enhanced mental rotation ability in time-space synaesthesia. Cogn Process 14:429–434

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cherry BJ, Zhang J, Scott G, Romero R, Babagay R, Henderson B et al (2007) Normative data on a modified mental rotation task in younger and older adults [abstract]. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 13:253

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper LA (1975) Mental rotation of random two-dimensional shapes. Cogn Psychol 7:20–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day S (2013) The synesthesia list. In: Synesthesia. http://www.daysyn.com/Synesthesia-List.html. Retrieved 8 July 2013

  • Dixon MJ, Smilek D, Merikle PM (2004) Not all synaesthetes are created equal: projector versus associator synaesthetes. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 4(3):335–343

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eagleman DM (2009) The objectification of overlearned sequences: a new view of spatial sequence synaesthesia. Cortex 45:1266–1277

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Farah MJ, Hammond KM, Levine DN, Calvanio R (1988) Visual and spatial mental imagery: dissociable systems of representation. Cogn Psychol 20(4):439–462

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hegarty M, Kozhevnikov M (1999) Types of visual–spatial representations and mathematical problem solving. J Educ Psychol 91(4):684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hubbard EM, Ramachandran VS (2005) Neurocognitive mechanisms of synaesthesia. Neuron 48:509–520

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hubbard EM, Ranzini M, Piazza M, Dehaene S (2009) What information is critical to elicit interference in number-form synaesthesia? Cortex 45(10):1200–1216

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jarick M, Dixon MJ, Stewart MT, Maxwell EC, Smilek D (2009) A different outlook on time: visual and auditory month names elicit different mental vantage points for a time–space synaesthete. Cortex 45:1217–1228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kosslyn SM, Chabris CF, Shephard JM, Thompson WL (1998) Spontaneous Use of Imagery Scale (SUIS). Unpublished

  • Limesurvey (2013) Limesurvey: the open source survey application. https://www.limesurvey.org/. Retrieved 12 Aug 2013

  • Logie RH, Pernet CR, Buonocorea A, Della Sala S (2011) Low and high imagers activate networks differentially in mental rotation. Neuropsychologia 49:3071–3077

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luzzatti C, Vecchi T, Agazzi T, Cesa-Bianchi M, Vergani C (1998) A neurological dissociation between preserved visual and impaired spatial processing in mental imagery. Cortex 34(3):461–469

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mann H, Korzenko J, Carriere JSA, Dixon MJ (2009) Time–space synaesthesia—a cognitive advantage? Conscious Cognit 18:619–627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marks DF (1973) Visual imagery differences in the recall of pictures. Br J Psychol 64:17–24

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Price MC (2009) Spatial forms and mental imagery. Cortex 45:1229–1245

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Price MC (2013) Synesthesia, imagery, and performance. In: Simner J, Hubbard E (eds) The Oxford handbook of synesthesia. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Rizza A, Price MC (2012) Do sequence-space synaesthetes have better spatial imagery skills? Maybe not. Cogn Process 13:299–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouw R, Scholte SH (2007) Increased structural connectivity in grapheme-color synaesthesia. Nat Neurosci 10:792–797

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sagiv N, Simner J, Collins J, Butterworth B, Ward J (2006) What is the relationship between synaesthesia and visuo-spatial number forms? Cognition 101(1):114–128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shepard RN, Metzler J (1971) Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science 171:701–703

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simner J (2013) Why are there different types of synesthete? Front Psychol 4:558

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simner J, Hubbard E (eds) (2013) Oxford handbook of synesthesia. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Simner J, Mayo N, Spiller MJ (2009) A foundation for savantism? Visuo-spatial synaesthetes present with cognitive benefits. Cortex 45:1246–1260

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tang J, Ward J, Butterworth B (2008) Number forms in the brain. J Cogn Neurosci 20(9):1547–1556

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson WL, Slotnick SD, Burrage MS, Kosslyn SM (2009) Two forms of spatial imagery: neuroimaging evidence. Psychol Sci 20(10):1245–1253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ward J, Li R, Salih S, Sagiv N (2007) Varieties of grapheme-colour synaesthesia: a new theory of phenomenological and behavioural differences. Conscious Cognit 16:913–931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weatherly DC, Ball SE, Stacks JR (1997) Reliance on visual imagery and its relation to mental rotation. Percept Mot Skills 85(2):431–434

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank David Brang and Sean Day for their assistance in recruitment and Manuel Mejia for his help creating stimuli. We thank Clare Jonas and Mary Spiller for early discussions about the issues described in this article and Romke Rouw for allowing us to adapt her projector/associator questionnaire.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, 7 George Square, Edinburgh, EH89YL, UK

    Andrew M. Havlik & Julia Simner

  2. School of Psychology, Pevensey Building, University of Sussex, Falmer, BN1 9QH, UK

    Duncan A. Carmichael & Julia Simner

Authors
  1. Andrew M. Havlik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Duncan A. Carmichael
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Julia Simner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Duncan A. Carmichael.

Appendix

Appendix

Projector/Associator Questionnaire for Sequence-Space Synaesthesia (PAQ-SSS/English), adapted from Rouw and Scholte (2007) and Rouw (unpublished). Projector items are 2, 4, 6, 9, 10 and associator items are 1, 3, 5, 7, 8. There were also seven filler questions which were not analysed either because we ultimately chose to balance the number of associator versus projector questions in our analysis, or because the content of the filler question was ambiguous between associator/projector.

For each question, please rate whether you Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither Agee no Disagree, Agree, or Strongly Agree

  1. 1.

    When I think about a certain sequence (e.g. numbers, months), the accompanying location appears only in my thoughts and not in my head.

  2. 2.

    It is as if some sequences (e.g. numbers, months) are actually at an external location.

  3. 3.

    When I look at a certain sequence (e.g. numbers, months) written down, the accompanying synaesthetic location comes in my thoughts, but on the paper itself, I only see the sequence as it’s been printed (e.g. a line of black text).

  4. 4.

    When I think about a certain sequence (e.g. numbers, months), the accompanying synaesthetic location is not only in my thoughts but also somewhere outside my head.

  5. 5.

    The sequence itself has no actual location I can perceive anywhere, but I am just aware that it is associated with a specific location.

  6. 6.

    If I see a sequence (e.g. numbers, months), then the synaesthetic location really is projected into space.

  7. 7.

    I do not see sequences literally in a particular location, but I have a strong feeling that I know where the sequence would belong (i.e. what location it would have).

  8. 8.

    I see the synaesthetic location only in my head.

  9. 9.

    If a sequence (e.g. numbers, months) is written on paper, I see the form of my own synaesthetic sequence (e.g. numbers, months) very clearly in the proximity of what’s written down (e.g. on top of it or behind it or above it).

  10. 10.

    When I think about a specific sequence (e.g. numbers, months), it also appears at an accompanying location somewhere outside my head.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Havlik, A.M., Carmichael, D.A. & Simner, J. Do sequence-space synaesthetes have better spatial imagery skills? Yes, but there are individual differences. Cogn Process 16, 245–253 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-015-0657-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-015-0657-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation