Spatial Cognition
Mental Scanning Task
Also called: image scanning task, map scanning task, mental image scanning, island map scanning task, imagery scanning paradigm
Measure how a remembered map is scanned in the mind: participants learn an island map, then move an imagined dot from one place to another, and the time to arrive grows with the distance.
11-14 minTimed: desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Try it here first, with no account.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 13
- Evidence grade
- D
- Registered clinical studies
- 0
J: the dot has arrivedWhat it measures
Measures how a remembered map is scanned in the mind. Participants learn an island map with 7 pictures, then picture it, focus on one place and move an imagined dot to a second place, pressing a key when it arrives. The main score is how much longer a scan across the map's width takes.
Constructs
- Visual mental imagery
- Image scanning
- Visuospatial working memory
- Spatial memory
Research uses
- Mental imagery research
- Spatial memory and map learning research
- Research on imagery in aging and development
- Within-study group comparison
How the paradigm works
The Mental Scanning Task measures how a remembered map is scanned in the mind's eye, the image-scanning paradigm of Kosslyn, Ball and Reiser (1978, Experiment 2). Participants first learn a map of an island with 7 pictures on it, placed so that the 21 distances between them all differ. They look at the map for at least 20 seconds, then click where each picture was, one at a time, and see the map again with their clicks joined to the right places; this repeats until every click lands within 4% of the map's width of its place, or for at most 6 rounds. The map then goes away. On each trial a picture from the map appears, and the participant pictures the whole map and focuses on that place. Four seconds later a second picture replaces it. If it is on the map, the participant imagines a small black dot moving in a straight line from the first place to the second, as fast as they can while still seeing it move, and presses a key when it arrives; if it is not on the map, they press the other key. Each of the 42 ordered pairs of places is scanned once, and 14 trials show a picture that is not on the map, in an order drawn from the session's seed in which no more than 4 trials of one kind come in a row. A last question asks how often the participant pictured the dot moving all the way. The map, its places and its coast are drawn by code; the pictures are Noto emoji, and each session draws which 7 are on the map and mirrors the map.
More about the paradigm
In Kosslyn and colleagues' study the time to scan grew in a straight line with the distance on the learned map, with a correlation of .97 across pairs, and when people were asked only to decide whether the second object was on the map, without scanning, distance had no effect. The main score here is the slope of a line fitted to each pair's mean time against its distance: the extra time to scan across the map's whole width. The intercept, the correlation of time with distance, accuracy on pictures on and not on the map, and how the map was learned are also reported. Times are those of right answers to pictures on the map, without answers under 100 ms and without wild scores, times more than twice the mean of the times at the same and the neighboring distances, as in the source.
The slope is read alongside how the task was done. Scanning times follow the instruction to scan, and critics have argued that they can also follow what people believe scanning should take (Pylyshyn 1981) or what they think the researcher expects (Intons-Peterson 1983); Kosslyn and colleagues left out people who reported following the imagery instructions less than 75% of the time. Scores support research and do not diagnose.
Scores
- Scanning Slopems
- Slope of the line fitted to each pair's mean scanning time against its distance as a share of the map's width: the extra time to scan across the map's whole width.
- Positive values mean longer scans took longer; not better or worse
- Scanning Interceptms
- The fitted line's time at no distance.
- Informational
- Distance-Time Correlationscore
- Pearson's r of each pair's mean scanning time with its distance.
- Values near 1 mean time grew steadily with distance
- Median Scanning Timems
- Median time of the right answers to pictures on the map that enter the slope.
- Informational
- Median Time, Not on the Mapms
- Median time of right answers to pictures that were not on the map.
- Informational
- Accuracy%
- Right answers as a share of right and wrong ones, over all test trials.
- Higher means fewer errors
- Accuracy, On the Map%
- Right answers to pictures on the map, as a share of right and wrong ones.
- Higher means fewer errors
- Accuracy, Not on the Map%
- Right answers to pictures that were not on the map, as a share of right and wrong ones.
- Below 0.50 is flagged for review
- Distances Scoredcount
- Pairs of places, of 21, with at least one usable scanning time.
- Under 15 is flagged for review
- Wild Timescount
- Times left out because they were more than twice the mean of the times at the same and the neighboring distances.
- Expected to be low
- Learning Roundscount
- Rounds of placing the pictures from memory before the scans began.
- Informational
- Map Learned0/1
- 1 when the last learning round had every picture within 4% of the map's width of its place, 0 when the rounds ran out first.
- 0 is flagged for review
- Scanning Reportedscore
- The answer to the last question, how often the dot was pictured moving all the way: 4 on almost every trial, 3 on most, 2 on some, 1 rarely or never.
- Below 3 is flagged for review
- Missed Trialscount
- Test trials with no key within 8 seconds of the second picture.
- Expected to be 0
- Anticipationscount
- Keys pressed under 100 ms after the second picture appeared, counted neither right nor wrong.
- Expected to be 0
Use and evidence
13 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, up 30% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 434 of 495 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 5 |
| 2024 | 2 |
| 2023 | 3 |
| 2022 | 1 |
| 2021 | 2 |
| 2020 | 3 |
| 2019 | 3 |
| 2018 | 3 |
| 2017 | 0 |
| 2016 | 1 |
| 2015 | 3 |
| 2014 | 4 |
| 2013 | 2 |
| 2012 | 3 |
| 2011 | 11 |
| 2010 | 5 |
| 2009 | 5 |
| 2008 | 4 |
| 2007 | 1 |
| 2006 | 4 |
| 2005 | 1 |
| 2004 | 1 |
| 2003 | 0 |
| 2002 | 0 |
| 2001 | 2 |
| 2000 | 1 |
Use grade E
Fewer than 30 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade D
Little published measurement evidence found.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 0
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 1
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 0
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.22.0, counted 3 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Map
- An island drawn by code with 7 Noto pictures on it, placed so that the 21 distances between them all differ, each at least 1.9% of the map's width longer than the next shortest, from 17% to 73% of the width. Each session draws which 7 of 14 pictures are on the map and mirrors the map, from a seed saved with the data.
- Learning
- At least 20 seconds with the map, then rounds of clicking where each picture was, one at a time, each followed by the map with the clicks joined to their places. Learning ends when every click is within 4% of the map's width of its place, or after 6 rounds (3 to 8 as a setting).
- Trial
- A blank for 1,000 ms, a picture from the map for 4,000 ms to focus on, then a second picture until F or J or 8,000 ms. On the map: move an imagined dot to it in a straight line and press the arrival key when it gets there. Not on the map: press the other key. Which key means arrival is drawn from the session's ID.
- Trials
- Each of the 42 ordered pairs of places once (twice as a setting), and 14 trials with a picture not on the map, 2 after each place. No more than 4 trials of one kind in a row, no start place twice within three trials and no scan starting where the last one ended, in parts of 28 trials.
- Practice
- 4 trials, 3 with the picture on the map and 1 without, each followed by 1,500 ms of feedback.
- Scoring
- The slope of a line fitted to each pair's mean time against its distance, in milliseconds per map width. Times of right answers to pictures on the map enter it, without answers under 100 ms and without wild scores: times more than twice the mean of the times at the same and the neighboring distances.
- Last question
- How often the dot was pictured moving all the way, from on almost every trial to rarely or never. An answer of some trials or fewer is flagged for review.
The map, its pictures and its scoring are this task's own; Kosslyn and colleagues' island map is not used. Scanning times follow the instruction to scan, and may also follow what people believe scanning should take, so compare groups given the same instructions. The map's size on screen differs between computers, so distances are measured in map widths. The scores support research and do not diagnose.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: mental_scanning_test from the scored run, the session's yes key when the second picture is on the map and the other key when it is not (chance 50%), correctness from the stored key and answer. Below chance invalidates and not above chance is flagged. Three in four pictures are on the map, so one key on most answers is not judged. Completing fewer than half the planned trials invalidates, and any other incomplete run is flagged. Under half the pictures not on the map answered right, a map not learned by the last learning round, a report of picturing the dot on only some trials or fewer, and fewer than 15 of the 21 distances with a usable time are flagged for review. Missed responses and responses under 100 ms follow the timed-test rule.
Why these rules
Accuracy significantly below chance (one-sided exact test, p < .05) cannot come from guessing; it means the response mapping was reversed or the task was not followed (Slick, Sherman and Iverson 1999 treat below-chance forced-choice performance as definite response bias). Chance-level accuracy can be a real result in impaired participants, so it is only flagged. Missed responses and responses under 100 ms keep the platform's timed-test rule: more than max(3, 25%) missed responses or more than max(2, 20%) responses under 100 ms invalidate, and any is flagged. A response under 100 ms cannot be a reaction to the stimulus. The slope rests on times that come from scanning a learned map: Kosslyn and colleagues (1978) left out people who reported following the imagery instructions less than 75% of the time, and found no effect of distance when people were not asked to scan.
No percentile. Scores and quality flags only.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Scans of each pair | 1 | 1 to 2 |
| Learning rounds, at most | 6 | 3 to 8 |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Timed test: participants need a desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad. Participant devices
- Languages: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- No percentile. Scores and quality flags only. How norms work
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the Mental Scanning Task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Kosslyn, Ball and Reiser, 1978), with the standard settings (scans of each pair: 1; learning rounds, at most: 6). The main score was scanning slope (slope of the line fitted to each pair's mean scanning time against its distance as a share of the map's width: the extra time to scan across the map's whole width).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Kosslyn, S. M., Ball, T. M., & Reiser, B. J. (1978). Visual images preserve metric spatial information: Evidence from studies of image scanning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4(1), 47-60. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.4.1.47The paradigm: an island map with 7 objects whose 21 distances all differ, learned by drawing until each was within .64 cm, then scanned by imagining a black speck; time grew with distance (r = .97 across pairs), and not when people only decided whether the object was on the map.
- Borst, G., Kosslyn, S. M., & Denis, M. (2006). Different cognitive processes in two image-scanning paradigms. Memory & Cognition, 34(3), 475-490. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193572A computer version: a pattern learned by drawing until each dot was within 0.3 cm, a 5-second focus, half the probes not in the pattern, and each participant's slope fitted to the mean time for each distance.
- Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1981). The imagery debate: Analogue media versus tacit knowledge. Psychological Review, 88(1), 16-45. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.88.1.16The argument that scanning times can follow what people know about how real scanning would go.
- Intons-Peterson, M. J. (1983). Imagery paradigms: How vulnerable are they to experimenters' expectations? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9(3), 394-412. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.9.3.394Results of imagery tasks, image scanning among them, moved with what the experimenters expected.
Source papers
- Kosslyn SM, Ball TM, Reiser BJ (1978). Visual images preserve metric spatial information: Evidence from studies of image scanning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4(1):47-60.Paradigm source, Young adults
- Borst G, Kosslyn SM, Denis M (2006). Different cognitive processes in two image-scanning paradigms. Memory & Cognition, 34(3):475-490.Paradigm source, Young adults
- No normative data for this task.Paradigm source, N/A
Questions
How long does the Mental Scanning Task take?
About 11 to 14 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Timed test: participants need a desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Scanning Slope, Scanning Intercept, Distance-Time Correlation, Median Scanning Time, Median Time, Not on the Map, Accuracy, Accuracy, On the Map, Accuracy, Not on the Map, Distances Scored, Wild Times, Learning Rounds, Map Learned, Scanning Reported, Missed Trials and Anticipations. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the Mental Scanning Task used in research?
13 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, up 30% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 434 of 495 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade E). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.22.0, counted 3 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the Mental Scanning Task have?
In the published research, 0 papers report its test-retest reliability and 0 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade D in the ConductCognition test census).
Does it report a percentile?
No. Scores and quality flags only.
Which settings can a researcher change?
Scans of each pair (1 to 2) and learning rounds, at most (3 to 8). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
Participants can take this test in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.