Literature DB >> 32166609

The Internal Representations Questionnaire: Measuring modes of thinking.

Hettie Roebuck1, Gary Lupyan2.   

Abstract

Does the format in which we experience our moment-to-moment thoughts vary from person to person? Many people claim that their thinking takes place in an inner voice and that using language outside of interpersonal communication is a regular experience for them. Other people disagree. We present a novel measure, the Internal Representation Questionnaire (IRQ) designed to assess people's subjective mode of internal representations, and to quantify individual differences in "modes of thinking" along multiple factors in a single questionnaire. Exploratory factor analysis identified four factors: Internal Verbalization, Visual Imagery, Orthographic Imagery, and Representational Manipulation. All four factors were positively correlated with one another, but accounted for unique predictions. We describe the properties of the IRQ and report a test of its ability to predict patterns of interference in a speeded word-picture verification task. Taken together, the results suggest that self-reported differences in how people internally represent their thoughts relates to differences in processing familiar images and written words.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cognitive style; Inner voice; Internal representations; Language; Learning preference; Thought; Verbal representation

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32166609     DOI: 10.3758/s13428-020-01354-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Res Methods        ISSN: 1554-351X


  27 in total

Review 1.  The cognitive functions of language.

Authors:  Peter Carruthers
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 12.579

2.  Vividness of mental imagery: individual variability can be measured objectively.

Authors:  Xu Cui; Cameron B Jeter; Dongni Yang; P Read Montague; David M Eagleman
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2007-01-19       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  The self-talk scale: development, factor analysis, and validation.

Authors:  Thomas M Brinthaupt; Michael B Hein; Tracey E Kramer
Journal:  J Pers Assess       Date:  2009-01

4.  Concreteness ratings for 40 thousand generally known English word lemmas.

Authors:  Marc Brysbaert; Amy Beth Warriner; Victor Kuperman
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2014-09

5.  Words Jump-Start Vision: A Label Advantage in Object Recognition.

Authors:  Bastien Boutonnet; Gary Lupyan
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-06-24       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Negative BOLD differentiates visual imagery and perception.

Authors:  Amir Amedi; Rafael Malach; Alvaro Pascual-Leone
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2005-12-08       Impact factor: 17.173

7.  What makes words special? Words as unmotivated cues.

Authors:  Pierce Edmiston; Gary Lupyan
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2015-06-24

8.  Self-talk and affective problems in college students: valence of thinking and cognitive content specificity.

Authors:  Esther Calvete; Ana Estévez; Covadonga Landín; Yolanda Martínez; Olga Cardeñoso; Lourdes Villardón; Aurelio Villa
Journal:  Span J Psychol       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 1.264

Review 9.  Inner Speech: Development, Cognitive Functions, Phenomenology, and Neurobiology.

Authors:  Ben Alderson-Day; Charles Fernyhough
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2015-05-25       Impact factor: 17.737

10.  The varieties of inner speech questionnaire - Revised (VISQ-R): Replicating and refining links between inner speech and psychopathology.

Authors:  Ben Alderson-Day; Kaja Mitrenga; Sam Wilkinson; Simon McCarthy-Jones; Charles Fernyhough
Journal:  Conscious Cogn       Date:  2018-07-13
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.