The mental imagery scale for art students: Building and validating a short form

Abstract

Mental imagery is a vital cognitive skill that significantly influences how reality is perceived while creating art. Its multifaceted nature reveals various dimensions of creative expression, amplifying the inherent complexities of measuring it. This study aimed to shorten the Mental Imagery Scale in Artistic Creativity (MISAC) via the Ant Colony Optimization algorithm (ACO), a metaheuristic methodology for developing psychometrically robust brief scales. Answering 63 items in the original version of MISAC demands a higher cognitive load and, consequently, more time. Therefore, our goal was to shorten it while preserving its psychometric properties. In this study, responses to the MISAC were obtained from 500 undergraduate students enrolled in an art education program. The items on the short form of the MISAC were selected based on pre-specified validity criteria and content representability. The 28-item short form of MISAC demonstrated comparable performance to the original version regarding construct validity, criteria-related validity, and reliability coefficients. Moreover, strict invariance was attained across both gender groups in the validation process of the short form. These results highlight the utility of the shortened version of the MISAC as a valid measure with minimal loss of information of scores compared to the full version.

Keywords

• Mental imagery
• Scale shortening
• Ant colony optimization
• Item selection
• Psychometrics

References

1. Andrade, J., May, J., Deeprose, C., Baugh, S.J., and Ganis, G. (2014). Assessing vividness of mental imagery: The Plymouth Sensory Imagery Questionnaire. British Journal of Psychology, 105, 547-563. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12050
2. Arshamian, A., & Larsson, M. (2014). Same but different: The case of olfactory imagery. Frontiers Psychology, 5, 34. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00034
3. Basarkod, G., Sahdra, B., & Ciarrochi, J. (2018). Body image-acceptance and action questionnaire-5: An abbreviation using genetic algorithms. Behavior Therapy, 49(3), 388-402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2017.09.006.
4. Betts, G.H. (1909). The distribution and functions of mental imagery. New York, Columbia University.
5. Bhattacharya, J., & Petsche, H. (2002). Shadows of artistry: cortical synchrony during perception and imagery of visual art. Cognitive Brain Research, 13(2), 179 186. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-6410(01)00110-0
6. Botes, E., Dewaele, J.M., & Greiff, S. (2021). The development and validation of the short form of the foreign language enjoyment scale. The Modern Language Journal, 105(4), 858-876. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12741
7. Bowns, R., Loeffelman, J.E., Steinley, D., & Sher, K.J. (2022). A brief young adult alcohol problems screening test: Short form development using combinatorics. Journal of American College Health, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2022.2095870
8. Brunner, M., Nagy, G., & Wilhelm, O. (2012). A tutorial on hierarchically structured constructs. Journal of Personality, 80, 796-846. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00749.x

9. Bulut, O. (2020). Testing for Measurement Invariance in R. Retrieved from https://okan.cloud/posts/2020-12-21-testing-for-measurement-invariance-in-r/
10. Calabrese, L., & Marucci, F.S. (2006). The influence of expertise level on the visuo-spatial ability: Differences between experts and novices in imagery and drawing abilities. Cognitive Processing, 7(1). 118-120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-006-0094-2.
11. Carr, T., Moss, T., & Harry, D. (2005). The DAS24: A short form of the Derriford Appearance Scale DAS59 to measure individual responses to living with problems of appearance. British Journal of Health Psychology, 10(2), 285 298. https://doi.org/10.1348/135910705X27613
12. Chamberlain, R., Drake, J.E., Kozbelt, A., Hickman, R., Siev, J., & Wagemans, J. (2019). Artists as experts in visual cognition: An update. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 13(1), 58. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000156
13. Chen, F.F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 464 504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834
14. Cornelissen, J.P., & Clarke, J.S. (2010). Imagining and rationalizing opportunities: Inductive reasoning and the creation and justification of new ventures. Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 539-557. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.35.4.zok539
15. Cumming, J., & Eaves, D.L. (2018). The nature, measurement, and development of imagery ability. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 37(4), 375 393. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276236617752439
16. Deaver, S.P., & Shiflett, C. (2011). Art-based supervision techniques. The Clinical Supervisor, 30(2), 257-276. https://doi.org/10.1080/07325223.2011.619456
17. Deneubourg, J.L., Pasteels, J.M., & Verhaeghe, J.C. (1983). Probabilistic behaviour in ants: A strategy of errors? Journal of Theoretical Biology, 105, 259 271. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5193(83)80007-1
18. Dilmac, O., & Kucuoglu, A. (2010). Güzel sanatlar eğitimi bölümleri resim-iş eğitimi anabilimdallarinda sunum dosyasina dayali özel yetenek sinav modeli [A sample of special ability test based on portfolio at the fine arts teaching departments]. Journal of Institute of Fine Arts, 18, 63-77.
19. Dodson, B. (2013). Keys to drawing with imagination: Strategies and exercises for gaining confidence and enhancing your creativity. Pegasus Press.
20. Dogan, B.G., Bulut, H.C. (2024) Abbreviation of parenting behaviors and temperament in children scales using genetic algorithms. Current Psychology, 43, 7044 7058. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04863-z
21. Drake, J.E., Simmons, S., Rouser, S., Poloes, I., & Winner, E. (2021). Artists excel on image activation but not image manipulation tasks. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 39(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276237419868941
22. Duncun, P. (2001). Visual culture: Developments, definitions, and directions for art education. Studies in Art Education, 42(2), 101 112. https://doi.org/10.1080/00393541.2001.11651691
23. Efland, A.D. (2002). Art and cognition: Integrating the visual arts in the curriculum. Teachers College Press.
24. Hetland, L., Winner, E., Veenema, S., & Sheridan, K.M. (2007). Studio thinking: The real benefits of visual arts education. Teachers College Press.
25. Heid, K., Estabrook, M., & Nostrant, C. (2009). Dancing with line: Inquiry, democracy, and aesthetic development as an approach to art education. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 10(3).
26. Holmes, E.A. & Mathew, A. (2010). Mental imagery in emotion and emotional disorders. Clinical Psychology Review, 30(3), 349-362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2010.01.001
27. Jankowska, D.M., & Karwowski, M. (2015). Measuring creative imagery abilities. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1591. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01591
28. Jankowska, D.M. & Karwowski, M. (2020). Mental imagery and creativity. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/eyfxr
29. Jankowsky, K., Olaru, G., & Schroeders, U. (2020). Compiling measurement invariant short scales in cross–cultural personality assessment using ant colony optimization. European Journal of Personality, 34(3), 470-485. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2260
30. Ji, J.L., Kavanagh, D.J., Holmes, E.A., MacLeod, C., & Di Simplicio, M. (2019). Mental imagery in psychiatry: Conceptual & clinical implications. CNS spectrums, 24(1), 114-126. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1092852918001487
31. Kleka, P., & Soroko, E. (2018). How to avoid the sins of questionnaires abridgement? Survey Research Methods, 12(2), 147-160. https://doi.org/10.18148/srm/2018.v12i2.7224
32. Kosslyn, S.M., Ganis, G., & Thompson, W.L. (2001). Neural foundations of imagery. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2, 635-642. https://doi.org/10.1038/35090055
33. Kozhevnikov, M., Kozhevnikov, M., Yu, C.J., & Blazhenkova, O. (2013). Creativity, visualization abilities, and visual cognitive style. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 196-209. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12013.
34. Krosnick, J.A., Holbrook, A.L., Berent, M.K., Carson, R.T., Hanemann, W.M., Kopp, R.J., ..., Conaway, M. (2002). The impact of “no opinion” response options on data quality: Non-attitude reduction or an invitation to satisfice? The Public Opinion Quarterly, 66(3), 371-403. https://doi.org/10.1.1.141.7834
35. Kruyen, P.M., Emons, W.H., & Sijtsma, K. (2014). Assessing individual change using short tests and questionnaires. Applied Psychological Measurement, 38, 201 216. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621613510061
36. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2010). Metaphors we live by (G.Y. Demir, Trans.). (Rev. ed. 2nd ed.). Paradigma Press.
37. Leite, W.L., Huang, I.C., & Marcoulides, G.A. (2008). Item selection for the development of short forms of scales using an ant colony optimization algorithm. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 43(3), 411-431. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273170802285743
38. Marcoulides, G.A., & Drezner, Z. (2003). Model specification searches using ant colony optimization algorithms. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 10(1), 154-164. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM1001_8
39. Marks, D.F. (1973). Visual imagery differences in the recall of pictures. British Journal of Psychology, 64, 17-24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1973.tb01322.x
40. Marks, D.F. (1995). New directions for mental imagery research. Journal of Mental Imagery, 19(3-4), 153-167.
41. McDonald, R.P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42. Miller, L.A. (2014). A self-report measure of cognitive processes associated with creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 26(2), 203 218. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2014.901088.
43. Narin, H. (2019). Sanat eğitimi öğrencilerinin zihinsel imgeleme kapasitesini belirlemeye yönelik bir ölçme aracı geliştirme çalışması [A study on developing a measurement tool for determining mental imagery capacity of art education students]. [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Cukurova University.
44. Niessen, A.S.M., Meijer, R.R., & Tendeiro, J.N. (2016). Detecting careless respondents in web-based questionnaires: Which method to use?. Journal of Research in Personality, 63, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.04.010
45. Nunnally, J.C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3rd ed). McGraw-Hill.
46. O’Donoghue, D. (2011). Has the art college entry portfolio outlived its usefulness as a method of selecting students in an age of relational, collective and collaborative art practice? International Journal of Education & the Arts, 12(3), 1-27.
47. Olaru, G., Witthöft, M., & Wilhelm, O. (2015). Methods matter: Testing competing models for designing short-scale Big-Five assessments. Journal of Research in Personality, 59, 56-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2015.09.001
48. Olaru, G., & Jankowsky, K. (2022). The HEX-ACO-18: Developing an age-invariant HEXACO short scale using ant colony optimization. Journal of Personality Assessment, 104(4), 435-446. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2021.1934480
49. Ozmutlu, A., & Tomak, A. (2021). Examination of plastic arts field special ability exams in Turkey on the basis of their characteristics and risks. International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Intercultural Art, 6(12), 39-56.
50. Palmiero, M., Piccardi, L., Nori, R., Palermo, L., Salvi, C., & Guariglia, C. (2016) Editorial: Creativity and Mental Imagery. Frontiers Psychology, 7(1280). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01280
51. Park, M., & Yoo, J. (2020). Effects of perceived interactivity of augmented reality on consumer responses: A mental imagery perspective. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 52, 101912. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101912
52. Pearson, J. (2019). The human imagination: The cognitive neuroscience of visual mental imagery. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 20(10), 624 634. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-019-0202-9
53. Pearson, J., Naselaris, T., Holmes, E.A., & Kosslyn, S.M. (2015). Mental imagery: Functional mechanisms and clinical applications. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(10), 590-602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.08.003.
54. Pérez-Fabello, M.J., & Campos, A. (2007). Influence of training in artistic skills on mental imaging capacity, Creativity Research Journal, 19(2-3), 227-232.
55. Pérez-Fabello, M.J., Campos, A., & Campos-Juanatey, D. (2016). Is object imagery central to artistic performance?. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 21, 67 74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.006.
56. R Core Team (2022). R: A Language and environment for statistical computing. (Version 4.0) [Computer software]. https://cran.r-project.org
57. Raborn, A.W., & Leite, W.L. (2018). ShortForm: An R package to select scale short forms with the ant colony optimization algorithm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 42(6), 516-517. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621617752993
58. Raborn, A.W., Leite, W.L., & Marcoulides, K.M. (2020). A comparison of metaheuristic optimization algorithms for scale short-form development. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 80(5), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164420906600
59. Rammstedt, B., & Beierlein, C. (2014). Can’t we make it any shorter? The limits of personality assessment and ways to overcome them. Journal of Individual Differences, 35(4), 212-220. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000141
60. Revelle, W. (2019). psych: Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and Personality Research. [R package]. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/package=psych.
61. Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
62. Rosenberg, H.S. (1987). Visual artists and imagery. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 7(1), 77-93. https://doi.org/10.2190/AVJ5-N24B-P7MC-HR4R.
63. Sandy, C.J., Gosling, S.D., & Koelkebeck, T. (2014). Psychometric comparison of automated versus rational methods of scale abbreviation: An illustration using a brief measure of values. Journal of Individual Differences, 35(4), 221-235. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000144
64. Saulsman, L.M., Ji, J.L., & McEvoy, P.M. (2019). The essential role of mental imagery in cognitive behaviour therapy: What is old is new again. Australian Psychologist, 54(4), 237-244. https://doi.org/10.1111/ap.12406
65. Schellen, L., Loomans, M., de Wit, M., & van Marken Lichtenbelt, W. (2013). The influence of different cooling techniques and gender on thermal perception. Building Research & Information, 41(3), 330-341. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2013.772002
66. Schroeders, U., Wilhelm, O., & Olaru, G. (2016). Meta-heuristics in short scale construction: Ant colony optimization and genetic algorithm. PloS One, 11(11), e0167110. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0167110
67. Schwarz, S., Grasmann, D., Schreiber, F., & Stangier, U. (2020). Mental imagery and its relevance for psychopathology and psychological treatment in children and adolescents: A systematic review. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy, 13, 303 327. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41811-020-00092-5
68. Serig, D. (2006). A conceptual structure of visual metaphor. Studies in Art Education, 47(3), 229-247. https://doi.org/10.1080/00393541.2006.11650084
69. Sheehan, P.W. (1967). A shortened form of Betts’ Questionnaire Upon Mental Imagery. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 23(3), 386-389. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(196707)23:3<386::AID-JCLP2270230328>3.0.CO;2-S
70. Smith, G.T., McCarthy, D.M., & Anderson, K.G. (2000). On the sins of short-form development. Psychological Assessment, 12(1), 102. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.12.1.102
71. Swindle, R., Cameron, A., & Rosen, R. (2006). A 15-item short form of the psychological and interpersonal relationship scales. International Journal of Impotence Research, 18(1), 82–88. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijir.3901381
72. Taskesen, S. (2019). An investigation on special talent exams in the division of art teaching. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 7(10), 86 97. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v7i10S.4554
73. Tay, J. (2019). Art teachers’ perceptions about visual arts giftedness: Content and construct validation of perceptions about art giftedness [Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
74. Van de Schoot, R., Lugtig, P., & Hox, J. (2012). A checklist for testing measurement invariance. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9(4), 486 92. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2012.686740
75. Vellera, C., & Gavard-Perret, M. L. (2012). Is mental imagery ability an element for identifying creative consumers?. https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00851322
76. Yarkoni, T. (2010). Personality in 100,000 words: A large-scale analysis of personality and word use among bloggers. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(3), 363 373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2010.04.001
77. Yilmaz, S. (2016). The relation between visual perception tests organized for special talent exams and academic achievement in art teaching program. The Black Sea Journal of Social Sciences, 8(15), 55-74.
78. Yu, C.Y. (2002). Evaluating cutoff criteria of model fit indices for latent variable models with binary and continuous outcomes [Doctoral dissertation, University of California]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
79. Weijters, B., Cabooter, E., & Schillewaert, N. (2010). The effect of rating scale format on response styles: The number of response categories and response category labels. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 27(3), 236 247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2010.02.004
80. West, S.G., Finch, J.F., Curran, P.J., & Hoyle, R.H. (1995). Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications. In Hoyle, R.H (Ed.). Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: Problems and remedies, (p. 55-75). Sage
81. Ziss, A. (2011). The science of artistic assimilation of aesthetic reality (2nd ed.). (Y. Şahan, Trans.). Hayalbaz Books.