Luca
Visual thinking, also called visual/spatial learning, picture thinking, or right brained learning, is the phenomenon of thinking through visual processing.[1]
Visual thinking has been described as seeing words as a series of pictures.[citation needed] It is common in approximately 60%–65% of the general population.[1]
“Real picture thinkers”, those persons who use visual thinking almost to the exclusion of other kinds of thinking, make up a smaller percentage of the population. Research by child development theorist Linda Kreger Silverman suggests that less than 30% of the population strongly uses visual/spatial thinking, another 45% uses both visual/spatial thinking and thinking in the form of words, and 25% thinks exclusively in words. According to Kreger Silverman, of the 30% of the general population who use visual/spatial thinking, only a small percentage would use this style over and above all other forms of thinking, and can be said to be ‘true’ “picture thinkers”.[2]
Research and theoretical background
The Dutch nonprofit organization the “Maria J. Krabbe Stichting Beelddenken” conducts research on “beelddenken”.[3] The “Maria J. Krabbe Stichting” has developed a test, named the “Ojemann wereldspel”, to identify children who rely primarily on visual-spatial thinking. In this test, children are asked to build a village with toy houses and then replicate it a few days later.[citation needed]
In the Netherlands there is a strong and growing interest in the phenomenon of ‘true’ “picture thinking”, or “beelddenken”.[citation needed] As a result of increased media coverage during the last few years, there is an acceptance of its existence by the general public,[citation needed] despite criticism from Dutch psychologists and development theorists, principally N. van Woerden and R. Wiers.[citation needed] Several websites and foundations are dedicated to “beelddenken”.[4][5]
Non-verbal thought
See also: Cognitive psychology, Cognitive science and Nonverbal communication
Thinking in mental images is one of a number of other recognized forms of non-verbal thought, such as kinesthetic, musical and mathematical thinking.
Linguistics
A common assumption is that people think in language, and that language and thought influence each other.[citation needed] Linguistics studies how language is used and acquired.
The strong version of the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis in linguistics states that language determines thought, and that linguistic categories alone limit and determine cognitive categories. Although Whorf himself framed linguistic relativity in terms of “habits of mind” rather than determinism, the revolutionary nature of his hypothesis was met with much misinterpretation and criticism. In 1969, Brent Berlin and Paul Kay rejected the strong hypothesis using a color terminology study.[6]
Steven Pinker notes that we are not born with language, so that it is not likely that we are engineered to think in words alone.[7]
Multiple intelligences
Gardner’s multiple intelligences theory recognises various forms of intelligence, namely spatial, linguistic, logical-mathematical, bodily-kinesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalistic.[citation needed] Gardner’s theory is discussed and cited in many of David A Sousa’s ‘How the Brain learns’ series of books, including ‘How the Gifted Brain learns’ and ‘How the Special Needs Brain Learns’. Areas of competence may be reinforcing, but also mutually exclusive. In today’s society the link between IQ and education has weakened, but the idea of educated and intelligent has become synonymous, interchangeable; reinforced by verbalizers being better able to internalize information, advocate systems and design jobs that monetarily reward strengths, a cycle that is self-perpetuating.[citation needed]
Split-brain research
According to Roger Sperry the left hemisphere and the right hemisphere perform different tasks. The left and right hemisphere may be simultaneously conscious in different, even mutually conflicting, mental experiences that run in parallel. The right [non-verbal] hemisphere perceives, thinks, remembers, reasons, wills and emotes, all at a characteristically human level.[citation needed]
Research which builds on Sperry’s split brain research is reinforced by anecdotal evidence, which supports the premise that different architectures lend themselves to one of the channels, at the expense of the others.[citation needed]
Spatial-temporal reasoning and spatial visualization ability
Spatial-temporal reasoning is the ability to visualize special patterns and mentally manipulate them over a time-ordered sequence of spatial transformations.[1] Spatial visualization ability is the ability to manipulate mentally two- and three-dimensional figures.[1]
Spatial-temporal reasoning is prominent among visual thinkers as well as among kinesthetic learners (those who learn through movement, physical patterning and doing) and logical thinkers (mathematical thinkers who think in patterns and systems) who may not be strong visual thinkers at all.[1]
Photographic memory
Eidetic memory (photographic memory) may co-occur in visual thinkers as much as in any type of thinking style as it is a memory function associated with having vision rather than a thinking style.[citation needed] Eidetic memory can still occur in those with visual agnosia, who, unlike visual thinkers, may be limited in the use of visualization skills for mental reasoning.[citation needed]
Psychologist E.R Jaensch states that eidetic memory apart of visual thinking has to do with eidetic images fading between the line of the after image and the memory image.[citation needed] A fine relationship may exist between the after image and the memory image, which causes visual thinkers from not seeing the eidetic image but rather drawing upon perception and useful information.[citation needed] Individuals diagnosed with agnosia, may not be able to perform mental reasoning.[citation needed]
Learning styles
The acknowledgement and application of different cognitive and learning styles, including visual, kinesthetic, musical, mathematical and verbal thinking styles, are a common part of many current teacher training courses.[citation needed] Those who think in pictures have generally claimed to be best at visual learning.[citation needed]
Empirical research shows that there is no evidence that identifying a student’s “learning style” produces better outcomes. There is significant evidence that the widespread “meshing hypothesis”, the assumption that a student will learn best if taught in a method deemed appropriate for the student’s learning style is invalid.[8][9] Well-designed studies “flatly contradict the popular meshing hypothesis”.[8]
Concurrency with Dyslexia and Autism
Dyslexia
Research suggests that dyslexia is a symptom of a predominant visual/spatial learning.[10] Morgan used the term ‘word blindness,’ in 1896. Hinselwood expanded on ‘word blindness’ to describe the reversing of letters and similar phenomenon in 1900s. Orton suggested that individuals have difficulty associating the visual with the verbal form of words, in 1925.[citation needed] Further studies, using technologies (PET and MRI), and wider and varied user groups in various languages. support the earlier findings.[citation needed] Visual-spatial symptoms (dyslexia, Developmental coordination disorder, Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) and the like) arise in non-visual and non-spatial environments and situations; hence, visual/spatial learning is aggravated by an education system based upon information presented in written text instead of presented via multimedia and hands-on experience.
Autism
Visual thinking has been argued by Temple Grandin to be an origin for delayed speech in people with autism.[11] It has been suggested that visual thinking has some necessary connection with autism.[citation needed] Functional imaging studies on people with autism have been given support to the hypothesis that they have a cognitive style that favors the use of visuospatial coding strategies.[12]
Art and design education
Concepts related to visual thinking have played an important role in art and design education over the past several decades, but this has not always been the case.[13] In Ancient Greece, Plato tended to place an emphasis on music to aid cognition in the education of heroes because of its mathematical tendencies and “harmonies of the cosmos”. On the other hand, visual images, paintings in particular, caused the reliances on “illusionary images” [14] However, in the Western world, children begin primary school with abstract thought and shapes, but as we grow older, according to Rudolph Arnheim, “arts are reduced to a desirable supplement”[14] The general world trend in the late twentieth century caused an emphases towards scientific, mathematical, and quantitative approach to education, and art education is often refuted because it is based on perception. It is qualitative and subjective which makes it difficult to measure and evaluate.
However, fundamentals in visual thinking lay the ground work for many design disciplines such as art and architecture. Two of the most influential aspects of visual composition in these disciplines are patterns and color. Patterns are not only prevalent in many different aspects of every day life, but it is also telling about our interpretation of the world. In addition, there are now studied approaches to how color should be used in design where “the functional aesthetics of colour can be reduced to a small number of guidelines and lists the main properties needed to make design decisions leading to visual clarity”.[15]
At the same time, techniques in art and design can open up pathways to stimulate the thought process. Sketches offer an unrestrained way to get thoughts down on paper through the “abstract representations of ideas and idea structures”.[15] It is also an effective means of communication, especially for architects, for translating ideas from designer to client. Despite all the advantages of integrating art and visuals into education, it is a difficult skill to master. Those who can are well versed in visual analysis. It takes a lot of practice to have sketches evolve from “meaningless scribbles” to a complex “thinking tool”.[15]
Clive Thompson on the Power of Visual Thinking
When I went online to shop for a laptop this summer, I faced a blizzard of choices. Was an ultralight worth the price, or would a heavier model do? Did I need a big screen, or would it make the computer a pain to lug around? As I flipped from page to page reading screenfuls of specs, the options baffled me. So I picked up a different thinking tool: a crayon.
Using one of my son’s Crayolas, I drew doodles of all the laptops and covered them with little icons depicting the pros, cons, and cost of each. When I stood back and looked at the pictures, the answer leaped out. I could now “see” at a glance which deal best fit my needs and pocketbook (13-inch MacBook Pro with 8 gigs of RAM).
In essence, I used “visual thinking”—drawing pictures to solve a problem. And if you believe the visualization experts, a new language of pictures may be precisely what we need to tackle the world’s biggest challenges.
My crayon experiment was inspired by Dan Roam, a visual-thinking guru and author of The Back of the Napkin. Roam argues that our culture relies too heavily on words: Our school systems—and political systems—are designed to promote people who are verbal and eloquent. And text tends to encourage us to describe our problems as narratives or linear lists of facts.
But dynamic, complicated problems—like global warming and economic reform—often can’t be boiled down to simple narratives. They’re systems; they have many little parts affecting one another. In those situations, drawing a picture can clarify what’s going on. “Words,” Roam says, “won’t save us.”
For example, during the health care debate, President Obama couldn’t seem to communicate how the heck reform would work, no matter how many speeches he gave.
So Roam drew a series of witty napkin pictures illustrating the relationships between various health care players—doctors, insurers, patients—which he sketched on either side of a seesaw to show that what benefits one often hurts the other. Within a few weeks, nearly 300,000 people had viewed the images; many emailed Roam thanking him for finally explaining the reform. (Even members of Obama’s staff called, asking for help with future communications).
“If you want everyone to have the same mental model of a problem, the fastest way to do it is with a picture,” says David Sibbet, a visualization expert who has spent the past three decades consulting for large firms. He often works as a “keynote listener,” sitting in on meetings and drawing infographics to depict the issues raised. These images provoke aha moments far more often than typed or verbal summaries.
Unfortunately, picture-drawing is considered childish, which is partly why visual thinking has taken a backseat to verbal agility. But that may be changing, because the Internet has boosted the utility of imagery.
Consider the Google Maps mashups that highlight patterns in neighborhood crime or political donations, or the explosion of online animations that dissect public affairs (like the series RSA Animate). Even humor these days regularly employs visual tools, such as the charts at GraphJam or the satirical flowcharts in this very magazine.
But if we really want to unlock visual thinking, our digital tools have to evolve; they’re still too dominated by the keyboard. We need iPad-like surfaces the size of posters so we can sketch out concepts, share them with others, and mull them over until patterns emerge. The computer got us this far; the crayon might get us even further.
References
1.^ Jump up to: a b c d e Deza 2009, p. 526.
2.Jump up ^ Silverman 2005.
3.Jump up ^ [1]
4.Jump up ^ Startpagina “beelddenken”
5.Jump up ^ Stichting belddenken
6.Jump up ^ Berlin 1969.
7.Jump up ^ Steven Pinker, The Language Instinct
8.^ Jump up to: a b Pashler 2008.
9.Jump up ^ Felder 2007.
10.Jump up ^ Morgan (1896), Hinselwood (1900), Orton (1925)
11.Jump up ^ THINKING IN PICTURES: Autism and Visual Thought
12.Jump up ^ Sahyoun, Chérif P.; John W. Belliveau; Isabelle Soulières; Shira Schwartz; Maria Mody (2010). “Neuroimaging of the Functional and Structural Networks Underlying Visuospatial versus Linguistic Reasoning in High-Functioning Autism”. Neuropsychologia 48: 86–95. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.08.013. PMC 2795068. PMID 19698726. Retrieved 10 March 2013.
13.Jump up ^ Wisconsin’s Model Academic Standards for Art and Design Education
14.^ Jump up to: a b Arnheim, Rudolph (1969). Visual Thinking. University of California Press. ISBN 0520018710.
15.^ Jump up to: a b c Ware, Colin (2008). Visual thinking for design ([Repr.]. ed.). Burlington, Mass.: Morgan Kaufmann. ISBN 978-0123708960. Via: wikipedia, wired
