Reference Frame Preferences in Haptics Differ for the Blind and Sighted in the Horizontal but Not in the Vertical Plane

We investigated which reference frames are preferred when matching spatial language to the haptic domain. Sighted, low-vision, and blind participants were tested on a haptic-sentence-verification task where participants had to haptically explore different configurations of a ball and a shoe and judge the relation between them. Results from the spatial relation “above”, in the vertical plane, showed that various reference frames are available after haptic inspection of a configuration. Moreover, the pattern of results was similar for all three groups and resembled patterns found for the sighted on visual sentence-verification tasks. In contrast, when judging the spatial relation “in front”, in the horizontal plane, the blind showed a markedly different response pattern. The sighted and low-vision participants did not show a clear preference for either the absolute/relative or the intrinsic reference frame when these frames were dissociated. The blind, on the other hand, showed a clear preference for the intrinsic reference frame. In the absence of a dominant cue, such as gravity in the vertical plane, the blind might emphasise the functional relationship between the objects owing to enhanced experience with haptic exploration of objects.

[1]  Laura A. Carlson,et al.  Inhibition within a reference frame during the interpretation of spatial language , 2008, Cognition.

[2]  C. Thinus-Blanc,et al.  Representation of space in blind persons: vision as a spatial sense? , 1997, Psychological bulletin.

[3]  Michel Denis,et al.  Analog properties of cognitive maps constructed from verbal descriptions , 1992 .

[4]  G. Logan Linguistic and Conceptual Control of Visual Spatial Attention , 1995, Cognitive Psychology.

[5]  D W Corcoran,et al.  The Phenomena of the Disembodied Eye or is it a Matter of Personal Geography? , 1977, Perception.

[6]  P. Jolicoeur,et al.  The spatial frame of reference in object naming and discrimination of left-right reflections , 1990, Memory & cognition.

[7]  S. Millar Understanding and Representing Space: Theory and Evidence from Studies with Blind and Sighted Children , 1994 .

[8]  Roberta L. Klatzky,et al.  Functional Equivalence of Spatial Images Produced by Perception and Spatial Language , 2007 .

[9]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  Searching Imagined Environments , 1990 .

[10]  Laura A. Carlson,et al.  Interpreting spatial terms involves simulating interactions , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[11]  Laura A. Carlson-Radvansky,et al.  “What” Effects on “Where”: Functional Influences on Spatial Relations , 1999 .

[12]  A. Kappers,et al.  Differences between Early-Blind, Late-Blind, and Blindfolded-Sighted People in Haptic Spatial-Configuration Learning and Resulting Memory Traces , 2007, Perception.

[13]  Marijn E. Struiksma,et al.  What is the link between language and spatial images? Behavioral and neural findings in blind and sighted individuals. , 2009, Acta psychologica.

[14]  G D Logan,et al.  Distance and distraction effects in the apprehension of spatial relations. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  David E. Irwin,et al.  Frames of reference in vision and language: Where is above? , 1993, Cognition.

[16]  L. Carlson,et al.  The space in spatial language , 2004 .

[17]  J M Kennedy,et al.  Perspective taking, pictures, and the blind , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[18]  T. Vecchi,et al.  Supramodality effects in visual and haptic spatial processes. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[19]  L M Parsons,et al.  Perceived spatial organization of cutaneous patterns on surfaces of the human body in various positions. , 1987, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[20]  K Sathian,et al.  Mental rotation of tactile stimuli. , 2002, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[21]  Yuhong V. Jiang,et al.  Inhibition Accompanies Reference-Frame Selection , 1998 .

[22]  C. Spence,et al.  Developmental vision determines the reference frame for the multisensory control of action , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[23]  B. Tversky Spatial mental models , 1991 .

[24]  Martin Corley,et al.  Seeing ahead: Experience and language in spatial perspective , 2006, Memory & cognition.

[25]  D. E. Irwin,et al.  Reference Frame Activation during Spatial Term Assignment , 1994 .

[26]  Laura A. Carlson,et al.  Using spatial terms to select an object , 2001, Memory & cognition.

[27]  G. Logan Spatial attention and the apprehension of spatial relations. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[28]  Laura A. Carlson-Radvansky,et al.  The Influence of Functional Relations on Spatial Term Selection , 1996 .

[29]  Laura A. Carlson-Radvansky,et al.  The Influence of Reference Frame Selection on Spatial Template Construction , 1997 .

[30]  Matthijs L. Noordzij,et al.  Keep an eye on your hands: on the role of visual mechanisms in processing of haptic space , 2008, Cognitive Processing.

[31]  S. Levinson Frames of reference and Molyneux's question: Cross-linguistic evidence , 1996 .

[32]  P. Carpenter,et al.  Mental rotation and the frame of reference in blind and sighted individuals , 1978, Perception & psychophysics.

[33]  Robert Volcic,et al.  Haptic mental rotation revisited: multiple reference frame dependence. , 2009, Acta psychologica.

[34]  Laura A. Carlson,et al.  Selecting a reference frame , 1999, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[35]  A. Yamadori,et al.  Dissociation of body-centered and stimulus-centered representations in unilateral neglect , 2001, Neurology.

[36]  P. Pietrini,et al.  Imagery and spatial processes in blindness and visual impairment , 2008, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.