| Abstract: | We examine the possible reasons why the results of our recent study on imagery acuity differed from those of an attempted replication by Intons-Peterson and White. Comparison of the two studies suggests that the differences in results are likely to be due to differences in procedures for giving imagery instructions and measuring the fields of resolution, and not to the presence or absence of experimenter bias. Accordingly, we discuss the importance of using skilled and practiced experimenters when conducting imagery acuity experiments. In addition, we address issues raised by Banks concerning the identification of particular levels of functional equivalence in imagery and perception. |
