The experience of spatiality for congenitally blind people: A phenomenological-psychological study

This phenomenological-psychological study aims at discovering the essential constituents involved in congenitally blind people's spatial experiences. Nine congenitally blind persons took part in this study. The data were made up of half structured (thorough) interviews. The analysis of the data yielded the following three comprehension forms of spatiality; (i) Comprehension in terms of image-experience; (ii) Comprehension in terms of notions; (iii) Comprehension in terms of knowledge.Comprehension in terms of image experience is the form which is most concretely and clearly experienced. It is important to notice, that this kind of image experience is not synonymous with a visually based image experience — a fact which is discussed in the article. The following three features, which are to be understood as a description of what characterizes congenitally blind people's image experience, are presented; (i) Experience of the whole; (ii) Synthesizing/Harmonizing; (iii) Spontanous presentation of the whole. Furthermore, comprehension in terms of image experience is made up of the following four constituents, which aim at specifying the conditions for the possibility of having an image experience; (i) The image experience is based on tactile experiences; (ii) The inner horizon of the object has to be limited in order for the tactile sense to constitute an image experience; (iii) The person must have reached a certain degree of familiarity with the object; (iv) The importance of the emotional investment in the object.Comprehension in terms of notions can roughly be said to contain a mixture of sensory experiences and explicit cognitive processes. The third and most abstract form of comprehension is comprehension in terms of knowledge, which is exclusively constituted by means of cognitive processes. This third form is briefly characterized by the following; (i) The comprehension is not based on sensory experiences, but conveyed through the descriptions of other people; (ii) The comprehension is not tied to clear personal experiences, but is characterized by a general description; (iii) The comprehension is not contextual, but has a stereotype character.

[1]  L. Hartlage.  Verbal tests of spatial conceptualization. , 1969, Journal of experimental psychology.

[2]  A. Gurwitsch,et al.  The field of consciousness , 1964 .

[3]  G. Révész,et al.  Psychology and art of the blind , 1950 .

[4]  B. Jones.  Facilitation of visual perception through voluntary movement in elementary school children. , 1972, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[5]  John M. Kennedy,et al.  Blind People Recognizing and Making Haptic Pictures , 1980 .

[6]  Maurice Merleau-Ponty.  Phenomenology of Perception , 1964 .

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

[8]  G. Karlsson.  The Grounding of Psychological Research in a Phenomenological Epistemology , 1992 .

[9]  Allan Paivio,et al.  Word imagery modalities and associative learning in blind and sighted subjects , 1971 .

[10]  G. Karlsson.  Facts and meaning: An examination of their role in psychological research from a phenomenological perspective , 1990 .

[11]  J. Gibson.  The Senses Considered As Perceptual Systems , 1967 .

[12]  J. Gibson.  Observations on active touch. , 1962, Psychological review.

[13]  I. Rock,et al.  Vision and touch. , 1967, Scientific American.

[14]  L. Marks.  The Unity of the Senses: Interrelations Among the Modalities , 1978 .

[15]  A. Paivio.  Imagery and verbal processes , 1972 .

[16]  P W Davidson,et al.  Haptic judgments of curvature by blind and sighted humans. , 1972, Journal of experimental psychology.

[17]  M. V. Senden,et al.  Space and Sight , 1962 .

[18]  G. S. Marmor,et al.  Mental rotation by the blind: does mental rotation depend on visual imagery? , 1976, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[19]  G. Karlsson.  Psychological Qualitative Research from a Phenomenological Perspective , 1993 .

[20]  B. Jones,et al.  Spatial perception in the blind. , 1975, British journal of psychology.

[21]  D. Katz.  The World of Touch , 1989 .

[22]  Michael A. Hans.  Imagery and modality in paired-associate learning in the blind , 1974 .

[23]  A. Paivio.  Mental imagery in associative learning and memory , 1969 .

[24]  I. Hermann.  Clinging-going-in-search. A contrasting pair of instincts and their relation to sadism and masochism. , 1976, The Psychoanalytic quarterly.

[25]  J. Keenan.  Qualifications and clarifications of images of concealed objects: A reply to Kerr and Neisser. , 1983 .

[26]  G. Révész.  Gibt es einen Hörraum , 1937 .

[27]  The Problem of Space with Particular Emphasis on Specific Sensory Spaces , 1937 .

[28]  J. Keenan,et al.  Imagery in the congenitally blind: how visual are visual images? , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[29]  John Jonides,et al.  Imagery instructions improve memory in blind subjects , 1975 .

[30]  N H Kerr,et al.  The role of vision in "visual imagery" experiments: evidence from the congenitally blind. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[31]  Sigmund Freud,et al.  Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality , 1905 .

[32]  W. Schiff,et al.  Tactual Perception: A Source Book , 1983 .

[33]  William F. Fischer,et al.  Duquesne Studies in Phenomenological Psychology , 1973 .

[34]  Sigmund Freud,et al.  The Interpretation of Dreams , 1899 .