Three groups of observers pointed to target circles in a path on the ground, in two parallel rows. Participants in one group viewed the circles and then pointed blindfolded. Those in a second group were blindfolded and then touched the circles with a stick while walking past them. Volunteers in the third group were blind adults, a diverse group, who also used a stick to detect the circles. For all three groups, as distance to the circles increased, pointing azimuths shrank and elevations increased. We suggest that directions to targets on major environmental surfaces may be appreciated similarly by the blind and sighted. We challenge the assumption that the principle of convergence to the horizon, available through vision because of the way in which visual angle decreases on the retina, is not available through touch.
AndreJ.RogersS. (2006). Using verbal and blind-walking distance estimates to investigate the two visual systems hypothesis. Perception & Psychophysics, 68, 353–361.
2.
CabeP. A.HofmanL. L. (2012). Haptic distal spatial perception mediated by strings: Point of closest approach and bypass distance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 1328–1340.
3.
ChaoH.-Y.KennedyJ. M.WnuczkoM. (2013). Elevation easier than plan for sighted and early-blind adults in a perspective-taking task. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 75,1186–1192.
4.
Creem-RegehrS. H.WillemsenP.GoochA. A.ThompsonW. B. (2005). The influence of restricted viewing conditions on egocentric distance perception: Implications for real and virtual environments. Perception, 34, 191–204.
5.
EardleyA. F.Van VelzenJ. (2011). Event-related potential evidence for the use of external coordinates in the preparation of tactile attention by the early blind. European Journal of Neuroscience, 33, 1897–1907.
6.
ErikssonY. (1998). Tactile pictures: Pictorial representations for the blind. Gothenburg: Gothenburg University Press.
7.
GeussM. N.StefanucciJ. K.Creem-RegehrS. H.ThompsonW. B. (2012). Effect of viewing plane on perceived distances in real and virtual environments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 1242–1253.
8.
GibsonJ. J. (1950). The perception of the visual world. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
9.
HaberL.HaberR. N.PenningrothS.NovakK.RadgowskiH. (1993). Comparison of nine methods of indicating the direction to objects: Data from blind adults. Perception, 22, 35–47.
10.
HatwellY.Martinez-SarrochiF. (2003). The tactile reading of maps and drawings and the access of blind people to works of art. In HatwellY.StreriA.GentazE. (Eds.), Touching for knowing (pp. 255–273). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
11.
HellerM. A.KennedyJ. M. (1990). Perspective taking, pictures, and the blind. Perception & Psychophysics, 48, 459–466.
12.
HellerM. A.KennedyJ. M.ClarkA.McCarthyM.BorgertA.WempleL.RiddleT. (2006). Viewpoint and orientation influence picture recognition in the blind. Perception, 35, 1397–1420.
13.
HellerM. A.RiddleT.FulkersonE.WempleL.WalkA. McClureGuthrieS.KlausP. (2009). The influence of viewpoint and object detail in blind people when matching pictures to complex objects. Perception, 38, 1234–1250.
14.
HornD. L.LoomisJ. M. (2004). Spatial updating of targets in front and behind. Paidéia, 14, 75–81.
15.
JuricevicI.KennedyJ. M. (2006). Looking at perspective pictures from too far, too close, and just right. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 448–461.
16.
KennedyJ. M. (1993). Drawing and the blind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
17.
KennedyJ. M.CampbellJ. (1985). Convergence principle in blind people's pointing. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 8, 189–210.
18.
KennedyJ. M.JuricevicI. (2006a). Blind man draws using diminution in three dimensions. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 506–509.
19.
KennedyJ. M.JuricevicI. (2006b). Foreshortening, convergence and drawings from a blind adult. Perception, 35, 847–851.
20.
KoenderinkJ.van DoornA. J. (2003). Pictorial space. In HechtH.SchwartzR.AthertonM. (Eds.), Looking into pictures (pp. 239–299). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21.
KunzB. R.Creem-RegehrS. H.ThompsonW. B. (2009). Evidence for motor simulation in imagined locomotion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 1458–1471.
22.
LoomisJ. M.Da SilvaJ. A.FujitaN.FukusimaS. S. (1992). Visual space perception and visually-directed action. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 906–921.
23.
LoomisJ. M.KlatzkyR. L. (2007). Functional equivalence of spatial representations from vision, touch and hearing: Relevance for sensory substitution. In ReiserJ. J.AshmeadD. H.EbnerF. E.CornA. L. (Eds.), Blindness and brain plasticity in navigation and object perception (pp. 155–184). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
24.
LoomisJ. M.KlatzkyR. L.GolledgeR. G. (2001). Navigating without vision: Basic and applied research. Optometry and Vision Science, 78, 282–289.
25.
LoomisJ. M.PhilbeckJ. W. (2008). Measuring perception with spatial updating and action. In KlatzkyR. L.BehrmannM.MacWhinneyB. (Eds.), Embodiment, ego-space and action (pp. 1–43). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26.
MatherG. (2009). Foundations of sensation and perception. New York: Psychology Press.
27.
MillarS. (1994). Understanding and representing space: Theory and evidence from studies with blind and sighted children. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28.
OoiT. L.HeZ. J. (2007). A distance judgment function based on space perception mechanisms— Revisiting Gilinsky's (1951) equation. Psychological Review, 114, 441–454.
29.
OoiT. L.WuB.HeJ. H. (2001). Distance determination by the angular declination below the horizon. Nature, 141, 197–200.
30.
PhilbeckJ. W.LoomisJ. M.BeallA. C. (1997). Visually perceived location is an invariant in the control of action. Perception & Psychophysics, 59, 601–612.
PicardD.LebazS. (2012). Identifying raised-line drawings by touch: A hard but not impossible task. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 106, 427–431.
33.
PicardD.LebazS.JouffraisC.MonnierC. (2010). Haptic recognition of two-dimensional raised-line patterns by early-blind, late-blind, and blindfolded sighted adults. Perception, 39, 224–235.
34.
RandK. M.TarampiM. R.Creem-RegehrS. H.ThompsonW. B. (2011) The importance of a visual horizon for distance judgments under severely degraded vision. Perception, 40, 143–154.
35.
RandK. M.TarampiM. R.Creem-RegehrS. H.ThompsonW. B. (2012). The influence of object ground contact on perception of distance and size under severely degraded vision. Seeing and Perceiving, 25, 425–447.
36.
RogersS. (2003). Truth and meaning in pictorial space. In HechtH.SchwartzR.AthertonM. (Eds.), Looking into pictures (pp. 301–320). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
37.
TarampiM. R.Creem-RegehrS. H.ThompsonW. B. (2010). Intact spatial updating with severely degraded vision. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 23–27.
38.
TintiC.AdenzatoM.TamiettoM.CornoldiC. (2006). Visual experience is not necessary for efficient survey spatial cognition: Evidence from blindness. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1306–1328.
39.
WnuczkoM.KennedyJ. M. (2011). Pivots for pointing: Visually-monitored pointing has higher arm elevations than pointing blindfolded. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 1485–1491.
40.
WnuczkoM.KennedyJ. M.NiemeierM.SinghK. (2013). Mirror-image arm used in monocular, binocular and blindfolded pointing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 95–100.
41.
WuB.OoiT. L.HeZ. J. (2004). Perceiving distance accurately by a directional process of integrating ground information. Nature, 428, 73–77.
42.
WuB.HeZ.OoiT. L. (2008). Perceived relative distance on the ground affected by the selection of depth information. Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 707–713.
