IMAGINATION, COGNITION AND PERSONALITY, Vol.

29(1) 31-39, 2009-2010

SPATIAL IMAGERY: A NEW MEASURE OF THE

VISUALIZATION FACTOR

ALFREDO CAMPOS
University of Santiago de Compostela

ABSTRACT

This study proposes a new measure of spatial ability based on the measure
of the visualization factor. I assessed the reliability and the validity of
the Measure of the Ability to Form Spatial Mental Imagery (MASMI). The
test was designed consisting of an unfolded cube that the subjects had to
mentally reassemble before replying to 23 questions related to the cube.
Each question had 4 multiple choices, 2 true and 2 false, the total score being
the sum of all the correct answers and then subtracting the wrong responses.
The sample consisted of 138 undergraduate psychology students, with a
mean age of 20.1 years. I obtained a Cronbach’s a of .93. The MASMI was
correlated to different imagery measures—i.e., imagery questionnaires and
spatial tests. The results reveal that the new test provides a good measure for
the assessment of imagery ability. Fresh lines of research are proposed in
relation to these tests.

A current goal of research on mental imagery is to develop a reliable instrument for

measuring different types of mental imagery. Traditionally, mental imagery was
conceived as a unitary experience, and imagery questionnaires have been the
most extensively used instrument to measure this phenomenon (for a review see
McKelvie, 1995, and Richardson, 1994). Questionnaires have been designed for
the psychometric assessment of visual imagery vividness such as the Vividness of
Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ; Marks, 1973) or the Betts’ Questionnaire
Upon Mental Imagery (Betts’ QMI; Sheehan, 1967). Similarly, questionnaires

31

Ó 2009, Baywood Publishing Co., Inc.

doi: 10.2190/IC.29.1.c
http://baywood.com
32 / CAMPOS

have been designed to assess the ability to form imagery in order to enhance
performance in sport such as the Movement Imagery Questionnaire (MIQ; Hall
& Pongrac, 1983) or to measure the ability to control imagery—e.g., the Gordon
Test of Visual Imagery Control (Richardson, 1969).
Alternatively, imagery vividness has been measured using what has commonly
been termed as “objective” tests of imaginal ability (see Sheehan, Ashton, &
White, 1983, for a review). These tests are primarily spatial tests that involve
imagery rotation tasks such as The Spatial Test of Primary Mental Abilities (PMA;
Thurstone & Thurstone, 2002), or the Mental Rotation Test (Vandenberg & Kuse,
1978). Of the different measurement instruments available, the most popular has
been the imagery questionnaire and, of these, the VVIQ enjoys the highest
acceptance (Campos, González, & Amor, 2002; McKelvie, 1995; Richardson,
1994).
Traditionally, the ability to form mental imagery has been contrasted with
linguistic ability, and tests such as the Individual Differences Questionnaire (IDQ;
Paivio, 1971), and the Verbalizer-Visualizer Questionnaire (VVQ; Richardson,
1977a) have been designed to assess individual preferences for visual versus
verbal cognitive styles.
The comparison between questionnaires and image rotation tests has revealed
they are uncorrelated or poorly correlated (Blajenkova, Kozhevnikov, & Motes,
2006; Burton & Fogarty, 2003; Campos, 1998) which indicates that they measure
different abilities. Both cognitive and neuroscientific research (Kosslyn, 1994;
Kosslyn & Koenig, 1992) has suggested that visual mental imagery is not unitary,
and two types of visual mental imagery have been identified—i.e., object imagery
and spatial imagery (Blajenkova et al., 2006). The former focuses on the similarity
between the mental image and the real image of an object in terms of precise
form, size, shape, color, etc. (Blajenkova et al., 2006). The latter, however, deals
with the spatial relations among objects, parts of objects, movement of objects,
and complex spatial transformations (Blajenkova et al., 2006). Thus, the imagery
types are distinct and an individual may exhibit ability in one type but not in
the other (Blajenkova et al., 2006; Burton & Fogarty, 2003). Besides the visual
imageries, there are nonvisual imageries that refer to other sensory modalities—
i.e., auditory, cutaneous, kinaesthetic, gustatory, olfactory, and organic.
Carroll (1993) has proposed the involvement of five major discriminable first-
order spatial factors in spatial ability: visualization (VZ), speeded rotation (SR),
closure speed (CS), flexibility of closure (CF), and perceptual speed (P). Likewise,
Burton and Fogarty (2003) described five factors—i.e., visualization (VZ),
speeded rotation (SR), speed of closure (CS), visual memory spatial primaries
(MV), and a combined perceptual speed-closure flexibility factor (PCF). In both
studies the main factor was visualization (VZ), and to a lesser extent speeded
rotation (SR). In the visualization factor (VZ) a participant apprehends a spatial
form (Burton & Fogarty, 2003; Eliot & Smith, 1983). Speeded rotation (SR) refers
to the ability to perceive an object from different positions. This factor is usually
 SPATIAL IMAGERY / 33

defined by simple speed tests involving rotations and/or reflections (Burton &
Fogarty, 2003; Lohman, 1988).
Burton and Fogarty (2003) include the Paper Form Board (Ekstrom, French, &
Harman, 1976), Paper Folding (Ekstrom et al., 1976), and Surface Development
(Ekstrom et al., 1976) as tests for the measure of the visualization factor (VZ).
Burton and Fogarty reported a Cronbach’s a of .81 for the internal consistency
of the Paper Form Board, of .71 for the internal consistency of the Paper Folding,
and of .94 for the internal consistency of Surface Development. Correlations
of these tests with speeded rotation (SR) tests were moderate (Ernest, 1977;
Kozhevnikov, Hegarty, & Mayer, 2002; Poltrock & Brown, 1984; Richardson,
1977b). The Spatial Test of Primary Mental Abilities (PMA), a test of speed
rotation (SR), correlated .55 with Paper Form Board, .42 with the Paper Folding,
and .30 with Surface Development (Burton & Fogarty, 2003).
Visualization tests (VZ) were poorly correlated with the imagery vividness
questionnaires (Betts’ QMI, Gordon Test, and VVIQ; Burton & Fogarty, 2003;
Poltrock & Brown, 1984; Richardson, 1977b). Poltrock and Brown found that
the Paper Folding correlated .13 with the VVIQ and .10 with the Gordon Test. The
Paper Folding correlated –.05 with the Betts’ QMI and .10 with the Gordon Test
(Richardson, 1977b). Burton and Fogarty found that the Paper Form Board
correlated .09 with the Betts’ QMI, .18 with the Gordon Test, and .13 with the
VVIQ; the Paper Folding correlated .10 with the Betts’ QMI, .12 with the Gordon
Test, and .13 with the VVIQ; and the Surface Development correlated –.01 with
the Betts’ QMI, .17 with the Gordon Test, and .13 with the VVIQ.
Bearing in mind the findings obtained by Carroll (1993) and Burton and Fogarty
(2003) that the most significant factor was visualization (VZ), the aim of the
present study was to design a new measure for spatial ability by focusing on
the measure of the visualization factor. The aim of the new test was twofold:
to raise internal consistency in comparison to the levels observed in other tests
that measure the same phenomenon; and to design an instrument that was simple,
easy to apply, and readily understood by the subjects.

METHOD

Participants
The sample consisted of 138 second-year undergraduate psychology students
from the University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain (63 men and 75 women)
mean age of 20.1 years (SD = 1.8); range 19 to 23 years.

Materials
A test for the Measure of the Ability to Form Spatial Mental Imagery (MASMI)
was designed consisting of an unfolded cube (see Figure 1) that the subjects had
to mentally reassemble before replying to 23 questions related to the cube. Only
34 / CAMPOS

Figure 1. Example of an item on the MASMI.

Note: The MASMI is copyrighted by University of Santiago de Compostela
(Spain). All rights reserved. Copies of the questionnaire can be
obtained from servizo de Publicacións, Universidade de Santiago
de Compostela (www.usc.es/spubl/vp.html).

one cube was used, and the unfolded cube was visible during presentation of all
23 questions. Each question had four multiple choices, two true and two false,
the total score being the sum of all the correct answers and then subtracting the
wrong responses. The highest score was 46 and the lowest –46. Subjects were
allowed a maximum 10-minute period to complete the test. A previous pilot
study, conducted with 131 second-year undergraduate psychology students (78
women and 53 men), indicated that administration of MASMI to undergraduate
psychology students can be completed by most subjects in 10 minutes.
The Spanish version of the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire (VVIQ;
Campos et al., 2002) was employed. The questionnaire consists of 16 items
referring to different situations which the subject is asked to visualize and to rate
image vividness on a 5-point scale anchored by 5 (no image at all, you only know
 SPATIAL IMAGERY / 35

you are thinking of the skill) and 1 (perfectly clear and as vivid as normal vision);
thus, a high score indicates low imaging capacity. The subject first completes
the questionnaire with eyes open and then again with eyes closed. Questionnaire
reliability was estimated at .88. by Campos et al. (2002).
The Spanish version of the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire–
Revised Version (VVIQ-2; Campos & Pérez-Fabello, 2008) consists of 32 items
of which half are derived from the VVIQ. The score rating for each item ranged
from 1 (no imagery present at all; you only know that you are thinking of the
object) to 5 (perfectly clear image, as vivid as normal vision). Campos and
Pérez-Fabello (2008) have reported a Cronbach’s a of .91 for the VVIQ-2.
The Spanish version of the Betts’ Questionnaire Upon Mental Imagery
(Betts’ QMI; Campos & Pérez-Fabello, 2005) measures vividness of mental
imagery in seven sensory modalities: visual, auditory, cutaneous, kinesthetic,
gustatory, olfactory, and organic. The test consists of 35 items with a 7-point score
rating ranging from 1 (perfectly clear image which is as vivid as the actual
experience), to 7 (no imagery present at all; you only know that you are thinking of
the object). Campos and Pérez-Fabello (2005) have reported a Cronbach’s a of .92
for the internal consistency of the Spanish version.
The Spanish version of the Gordon Test of Visual Imagery Control (Gordon
Test; Pérez-Fabello & Campos, 2004) measures the subject’s manipulation or
control of mental images. The test consists of 12 items, each one with three
options: No = 0 points, Unsure = 1 point, or Yes = 2 points. Pérez-Fabello and
Campos (2004) have reported a reliability of .69 for the Spanish version of the test.
The Vividness of Visual Imagery Test (VVIT; Campos, 1998) consists of 21
items that measure the visual imagery abilities of adults. Each item requires
the subject to visualize an object and select one of two descriptions, one being the
correct description (score = 1), and the other incorrect (score = 0). Total test scores
can range from 0 (low imagery ability) to 21 (high imagery ability). Though no
time limit was given, most subjects required 10 minutes to complete the test.
Campos (1998) has reported an internal consistency of .58 for this test.
The Space Test of Primary Mental Abilities (PMA; Thurstone & Thurstone,
2002) measures the ability to mentally visualize and perceive two- or three-
dimensional objects. Subjects are shown 20 elements, each of which consists
of a two-dimensional geometrical figure and six similar but rotated figures;
and subjects have to identify which of the six figures represents the original
figure. Subjects are given 5 minutes to complete the test, and total test score
is obtained by adding the correct responses prior to subtracting the incorrect
ones. The test-retest reliability was .73 (Thurstone & Thurstone, 2002).

Procedure

In groups of 20, subjects were randomly administered the tests in two sessions,
with a 20-day interval, although care was taken to ensure that the VVIQ and
36 / CAMPOS

VVIQ2 were completed in different sessions given that half of the items on
the VVIQ2 appear in the VVIQ. All of the subjects voluntarily participated in
the tests and were informed that their results would remain strictly anonymous
and confidential.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The internal consistency of the MASMI, as measured by Cronbach’s a, was
.93. Test consistency was high, and even greater than that obtained in the spatial
ability tests of Ekstrom et al. (1976) or Burton and Fogarty (2003). Vandenberg
and Kuse obtained a test-retest reliability of .83 for the Vandenberg-Kuse
Mental Rotation Test while Thurstone and Thurstone (2002) obtained a test-retest
reliability of .73 for The Spatial Test of Primary Mental Abilities (PMA).
Descriptive statistics for the measures used in this study are presented in
Table 1. The difference between men (M = 23.40, SD = 15.53) and women (M =
21.72, SD = 12.58) on MASMI was not significant, t(136) = .533, p = .60. The
Pearson product-moment correlations for the MASMI and the other mental
imagery measures are shown in Table 2. The MASMI was significantly correlated
to the Spatial Relations Tests of PMA, a measure of speeded rotation (SR). This
correlation was similar to that observed in other studies that have correlated
the visualization tests (VZ) with the speeded rotation tests (SR; e.g., Blajenkova
et al., 2006; Burton & Fogarty, 2003; Kozhevnikov et al., 2002; Poltrock &
Brown, 1984; Richardson, 1977b).
The correlation between the MASMI and the imagery questionnaires (Gordon
Test, VVIQ2, VVIQ Total, and Betts’ QMI) was poor, which agrees with the
findings of other studies correlating visualization test (VZ) with the previously

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics for the Measures Used in Study

M SD Minimum Maximum

MASMI 21.96 13.00 0 46

PMA 26.25 13.28 0 54
VVIT 16.36 1.75 12 20
Gordon Test 21.05 3.66 3 24
VVIQ2 3.74 .70 1.31 4.94
VVIQ Eyes Open 2.09 .55 1.06 4.88
VVIQ Eyes Closed 1.88 .64 1.00 5.00
VVIQ Total 1.99 .54 1.03 4.94
Betts’ QMI 2.29 .67 .94 4.83
 SPATIAL IMAGERY / 37

Table 2. The Pearson Product-Moment Correlations between the

MASMI and the Other Measures of Imagery

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. MASMI
2. PMA .44**
3. VVIT .14 .16
4. Gordon Test .02 .10 .19*
5. VVIQ2 .13 .06 .04 .33**
6. VVIQ Eyes Open –.09 –.05 –.05 –.35** –.50**
7. VVIQ Eyes Closed –.17 –.10 –.10 –.36** –.41** .66**
8. VVIQ Total –.15 –.09 –.08 –.39** –.49** .90** .92**
9. Betts’ QMI –.02 –.10 –.01 –.38** –.55** .57** .38** .52**
*p < .05. **p < .01.

mentioned imagery questionnaires assessed in this study (e.g., Blajenkova et al.

2006; Burton & Fogarty, 2003; Poltrock & Brown, 1984; Richardson, 1977b).
Our findings indicate that MASMI test reliability was high, greater than that
observed in the Paper Form Board and Paper Folding, and similar to that observed
with the Surface Development. The validity was similar to that observed in
spatial tests, and similar to the imagery vividness questionnaires. Nevertheless,
further studies are required to assess the relationship of this test with other
measures of imagery as well as analyzing the relationship between the MASMI
and each of the five factors of spatial ability described by Carroll (1993) and
Burton and Fogarty (2003).

REFERENCES

Blajenkova, O., Kozhevnikov, M., & Motes, M. A. (2006). Object-spatial imagery:

A new self-report imagery questionnaire. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20,
239-263.
Burton, L. J., & Fogarty, G. J. (2003). The factor structure of visual imagery and spatial
abilities. Intelligence, 31, 289-318.
Campos, A. (1998). A measure of visual imaging capacity: A preliminary study. Perceptual
and Motor Skills, 87, 1012-1014.
Campos, A., González, M. A., & Amor, A. (2002). The Spanish version of the Vividness of
Visual Imagery Questionnaire: Factor structure and internal consistency reliability.
Psychological Reports, 90, 503-506.
38 / CAMPOS

Campos, A., & Pérez-Fabello, M. J. (2005). The Spanish version of Betts’ Questionnaire
upon Mental Imagery. Psychological Reports, 96, 51-56.
Campos, A., & Pérez-Fabello, M. J. (2008). Psychometric quality of a Revised Version
Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ekstrom, R. B., French, J. W., & Harman, H. H. (1976). Kit of factor-referenced cognitive
tests. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Eliot, J., & Smith, I. M. (1983). An international directory of spatial tests. Windsor:
NFER-NELSON.
Ernest, C. H. (1977). Mental imagery and cognition: A critical review. Journal of Mental
Imagery, 1, 181-215.
Hall, C., & Pongrac, C. (1983). Movement Imagery Questionnaire. London, Canada:
University of Western Ontario.
Kosslyn, S. M. (1994). Image and brain: The resolution of the imagery debate. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Kosslyn, S. M., & Koenig, O. (1992). Wet mind: The new cognitive neuroscience. New
York: Free Press.
Kozhevnikov, M., Hegarty, M., & Mayer, R. E. (2002). Revising the visualizer-verbalizer
dimension: Evidence for two types of visualizers. Cognition and Instruction, 20,
47-77.
Lohman, D. F. (1988). Spatial abilities as traits, processes, and knowledge. In R. J. Sternber
(Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (Vol. 4; pp. 181-248).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Marks, D. F. (1973). Visual imagery differences in the recall of pictures. British Journal
of Psychology, 64, 17-24.
McKelvie, S. J. (1995). The VVIQ as a psychometric test of individual differences in
visual imagery vividness: A critical quantitative review and plea for direction.
Journal of Mental Imagery, 19, 1-106.
Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. Oxford: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Pérez-Fabello, M. J., & Campos, A. (2004). Factor structure and internal consistency of
the Spanish version of the Gordon Test of Visual Imagery Control. Psychological
Reports, 94, 761-766.
Poltrock, S. E., & Brown, P. (1984). Individual differences in visual imagery and spatial
ability. Intelligence, 8, 93-138.
Richardson, A. (1969). Mental imagery. New York: Springer.
Richardson, A. (1977a). Verbalizer-visualizer: A cognitive style dimension. Journal of
Mental Imagery, 1, 109-125.
Richardson, A. (1977b). The meaning and measurement of memory imagery. British
Journal of Psychology, 68, 29-43.
Richardson, A. (1994). Individual differences in imaging. Amityville, NY: Baywood.
Sheehan, P. W. (1967). A shortened form of Betts’ Questionnaire Upon Mental Imagery.
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 23, 386-389.
Sheehan, P. W., Ashton, R., & White, K. (1983). Assessment of mental imagery. In A. A.
Sheikh (Ed.), Imagery: Current theory, research and application (pp. 189-221). New
York: Wiley.
 SPATIAL IMAGERY / 39

Thurstone, L. L., & Thurstone, T. G. (2002) Aptitudes Mentales Primarias [Primary Mental
Abilities]. Madrid: TEA Ediciones.
Vandenberg, S. G., & Kuse, A. R. (1978). Mental rotations, a group test of three-
dimensional spatial visualization. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47, 599-604.

Direct reprint requests to:

Alfredo Campos
University of Santiago de Compostela
Department of Basic Psychology
15782 Santiago de Compostela
Spain
e-mail: alfredo.campos@usc.es