The vast majority of the people who have been identified as possessing eidetic imagery are children. The prevalence estimates of the ability among preadolescents range from about 2 percent to 10 percent. And it is an equal-opportunity phenomenon--theres no gender difference in who is likely to be an eidetiker. Although it is certainly controversial, some researchers also believe that eidetic imagery occurs more frequently in certain populations of the mentally retarded specifically, in individuals whose retardation most likely stems from biological, rather than environmental, causes and also among geriatric populations.
With a few notable exceptions, however, most research has shown that virtually no adults seem to possess the ability to form eidetic images. Why should this be so? No one really knows, although part of the answer may be related to a rather obscure fact about the development of such images.
Research has shown that if a person verbalizes during the time he or she is scanning the original picture, this interferes with eidetic image formation. This utterance could be something as seemingly innocuous as covertly saying "Saint Bernard" upon seeing a large dog during the initial scanning process.
So perhaps part of the reason why it is so rare to find older eidetikers is that adults are much more likely than children to try to both verbally and visually encode the picture into memory. If this is true, then it means that adults are more likely to disrupt the formation of eidetic images and are thus much less likely to be identified as having eidetic imagery, even if they really do possess the ability.
Can you acquire eidetic imagery through learning? Personally, I doubt it. To my knowledge, however, there have been no attempts to try to teach the ability to anyone. Although it is clear that eidetic imagery exists, psychologists still do not know why it occurs, what brain mechanisms may be responsible, or why it is found in such a small proportion of the population.
It certainly is a fascinating phenomenon. Sign up for our email newsletter. Whether photographic memory is attainable or not, there are strategies for supporting your brain to remember more of what you see. And that is a very good thing. Once upon a time, it was thought that only around 60 percent of the population were visual learners, meaning that they were able to retain knowledge and memory obtained via visual stimuli.
The current conventional wisdom is that all — or practically all — people obtain knowledge and memory this way. Visual learning differs theoretically from photographic memory, but may be a necessary element in its occurrence. That is assuming that photographic memory is a real thing. People who believe themselves to have photographic memory say they can look at a photograph, scene, image, or other form of visual stimuli and retain that image exactly as it appeared for an extended period of time.
While we do know that the brain has a very large capacity for retaining visual, long-term memories, this type of claim is hard to substantiate definitively. Certainly, there are people who have better photographic recall than others.
Some early studies correlated photographic memory with intelligence, although this is unproven. People with eidetic memory are known as eidetikers. Eidetikers are sometimes tested via a technique known as the Picture Elicitation Method. This method utilizes an unfamiliar visual prompt, such as a painting or photograph.
The person with eidetic memory is allowed to study the visual for around 30 seconds. Eidetic images can be visually removed from memory by blinking. Once gone, they cannot be retrieved accurately. In addition, the recall of eidetic images often shows gaps between what was seen and what is remembered. This indicates that the memory may be a reconstruction of what was seen, rather than an accurate and exact memory. Eidetic memories may in fact be generated the same way by the brain, and may not be photographic renditions at all.
You can, however, train your brain to remember more. Mnemonics use patterns of associations, letters, images, or ideas to help you remember something. It's possible Mr. Gordon's ability took a big jump around his 16th birthday, but it's also possible he noticed it only then.
Gordon might want to have formal testing, to see just how good his memory is and in what areas. Then we can debate the nature-nurture question from harder evidence. This article was originally published with the title "I developed what appears to be a photographic memory when I was 16 years old. Already a subscriber? Sign in. Thanks for reading Scientific American. Create your free account or Sign in to continue.
See Subscription Options. Go Paperless with Digital. Get smart.
0コメント