Sensory substitution: an approach to the experimental study of perception / Sustitución sensorial: un abordaje para el estudio experimental de la percepción

Abstract

Spanish

Sensory substitution refers to the phenomenon where object and environment information normally acquired through one sense can be obtained by another sense. For example, visual input being provided by hearing or touching. Sensory substitution devices are technological designs that transform the characteristics of one sensory modality into stimuli of another sensory modality. These devices were developed with two purposes: (1) to assist people with sensory disabilities in daily tasks; and (2) to study the involved mechanisms of brain plasticity. This article reviews studies in which sensory substitution phenomenon is employed as a methodological strategy to study visual perception. Furthermore, its use is discussed as an experimental platform to contrast new perceptual theories and underlying neurophysiological mechanisms that are currently under review.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Amedi

Jacobson

Hendler

Malach

Zohary

(2002) Convergence of visual and tactile shape processing in the human lateral occipital complex. Cerebral Cortex, 12, 1202–1212. doi: 10.1093/cercor/12.11.1202

Amedi

Kriegstein

Atteveldt

N. M.

Beauchamp

M. S.

Naumer

M. J.

(2005). Functional imaging of human crossmodal identification and object recognition. Experimental Brain Research, 166, 559–571. doi:10.1007/s00221-005-2396-5

Amedi

Stern

W. M.

Camprodon

J. A.

Bermpohl

Merabet

Rotman

Pascual-Leone

(2007). Shape conveyed by visual-to-auditory sensory substitution activates the lateral occipital complex. Nature Neuroscience, 10, 687–689. doi:10.1038/nn1912

Ammar

A. A.

Gapenne

Blomme

Rovira

(2005). Analyse de l’exploration tactile sur support traditionnel chez la personne aveugle et conception de l’interface de lecture Tactos. Revue d’intelligence artificielle, 19, 339–354. doi:10.3166/ria.19.339-354

Auvray

Myin

(2009). Perception with compensatory devices: From sensory substitution to sensorimotor extension. Cognitive Science, 33, 1036–1058. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01040.x

Auvray

Philipona

O’Regan

J. K.

Spence

(2007). The perception of space and form recognition in a simulated environment: The case of minimalist sensory-substitution devices. Perception, 36, 1736–1751. doi:10.1068/p5800

Bach-y-Rita

(1967). Sensory plasticity. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 43, 417–426. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0404.1967.tb05747.x

Bach-y-Rita

(1972). Brain mechanisms in sensory substitution. New York, NY: Academic Press.

Bach-y-Rita

Collins

C. C.

Saunders

F. A.

White

Scadden

(1969). Vision substitution by tactile image projection. Nature, 221, 963–964. doi:10.1038/221963a0

10.

Bach-y-Rita

Kercel

S. W.

(2003). Sensory substitution and the human-machine interface. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 541–546. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2003.10.013

11.

Bermejo

Ramos

Arias

(2009). Descubriendo figuras geométricas invisibles: una experiencia en sustitución sensorial. XII Reunión Nacional y I Encuentro Internacional de la Asociación Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento. Buenos Aires, Argentina, 25–27 August.

12.

Bird

Marshall

Rogers

(2009). Low-fi skin vision: A case study in rapid prototyping a sensory substitution system. Proceedings of HCI, 55–64.

13.

Block

(2003). Tactile sensation via spatial perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 285–286. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00132-3

14.

Burton

(2003). Visual cortex activity in early and late blind people. Journal of Neuroscience, 23(10), 4005–4011.

15.

Clark

(2003). Natural-born cyborgs: Minds technologies, and the future of human intelligence. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

16.

Clark

(2008). Supersizing the mind: Embodiment, action, and cognitive extension. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

17.

Collins

C. C.

(1985). On mobility aids for the blind. In Warren

D. H.

Strelow

E. R.

(Eds.), Electronic spatial sensing for the blind (pp. 35–64). Boston: Martinus Nijhoff.

18.

Díaz

Barrientos

Jacobs

D. M.

Travieso

(2012). Action-contingent vibrotactile flow facilitates the detection of ground level obstacles with a partly virtual sensory substitution device. Human Movement Science, 31, 1571–1584. doi:10.1016/j.humov.2012.05.006

19.

Fingerhut

(2009) The Explanatory Value of the Active Body for Perceptual Consciousness (Position Paper) Key Issues in Sensory Augmentation. Workshop, University of Sussex, Brighton, 26–27 March.

20.

Froese

McGann

Bigge

Spiers

Seth

A. K.

(2012). The enactive torch: A new tool for the science of perception. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 5, 365–375. doi:10.1109/TOH.2011.57

21.

Froese

Spiers

(2007). Toward a phenomenological pragmatics of enactive perception. Enactive/07: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Enactive Interfaces, Grenoble, France: Association ACROE, 105–108

22.

Humphrey

(1992). A history of the mind. London: Chatto and Windus.

23.

Hurley

Noë

(2003). Neural plasticity and consciousness. Biology and Philosophy, 18, 131–168. doi:10.1023/A:1023308401356

24.

Kim

J.-K.

Zatorre

R. J.

(2008). Generalized learning of visual-to-auditory substitution in sighted individuals. Brain Research, 1242, 263–275. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2008.06.038

25.

Kiverstein

Farina

(2012). Do sensory substitution devices extend the conscious mind? In Paglieri

(Ed.), Consciousness in interaction: The role of the natural and social context in shaping consciousness (pp. 19–40). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

26.

Lenay

Canu

Villon

(1997). Technology and perception: The contribution of sensory substitution systems. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Cognitive Technology, Aizu-Wakamatsu, Japan, 44–53.

27.

Lenay

Gapenne

Hanneton

Marque

Geouelle

(2003). Sensory Substitution: Limits and perspectives. Touching for Knowing, Cognitive Psychology of Haptic Manual Perception, 275–292. doi:10.1075/aicr.53.22len

28.

Lenay

Steiner

(2010). Beyond the internalism/externalism debate: The constitution of the space of perception. Consciousness and Cognition, 19, 938–952. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2010.06.011

29.

Loomis

J. M.

Klatzky

R. L.

Giudice

(2012). Sensory substitution of vision: Importance of perceptual and cognitive processing. In Manduchi

Kurniawan

(Eds.), Assistive technology for blindness and low vision (pp. 162–191). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

30.

McGann

(2010). Perceptual modalities: Modes of presentation or modes of interaction? Journal of Consciousness Studies, 17(1–2), 72–94.

31.

Meijer

P. B. L.

(1992). An experimental system for auditory image representations. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 39, 112–121. doi:10.1109/10.121642

32.

Merabet

L. B.

Battelli

Obretenova

Maguire

Meijer

Pascual-Leone

(2009). Functional recruitment of visual cortex for sound encoded object identification in the blind. Neuroreport, 20, 132–138. doi:10.1097/WNR.0b013e32832104dc

33.

Merabet

L. B.

Rizzo

J. F.

Amedi

Somers

D. C.

Pascual-Leone

(2005). What blindness can tell us about seeing again: Merging neuroplasticity and neuroprostheses. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience, 6, 71–77. doi:10.1038/nrn1586

34.

O’Regan

J. K.

Noë

(2001). A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 939–973. doi:10.1017/S0140525X01000115

35.

Pascual-Leone

Hamilton

(2001). The metamodal organization of the brain. Progress in Brain Research, 134, 427–445. doi:10.1016/S0079-6123(01)34028-1

36.

Proulx

M. J.

(2010). Synthetic synaesthesia and sensory substitution. Consciousness and Cognition, 19, 501–503. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2009.12.005

37.

Ptito

Moesgaard

S. M.

Gjedde

Kupers

(2005). Cross-modal plasticity revealed by electrotactile stimulation of the tongue in the congenitally blind. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 128, 606–614. doi:10.1093/brain/awh380

38.

Rauschecker

J. P.

(1995). Compensatory plasticity and sensory substitution in the cerebral cortex. Trends in Neurosciences, 18, 36–43. doi:10.1016/0166-2236(95)93948-W

39.

Renier

Bruyer

De Volder

A. G.

(2006). Vertical-horizontal illusion present for sighted but not early blind humans using auditory substitution of vision. Perception & Psychophysics, 68, 535–542. doi:10.3758/BF03208756

40.

Renier

Collignon

Poirier

Tranduy

Vanlierde

Bol

De Volder

A. G.

(2005). Cross-modal activation of visual cortex during depth perception using auditory substitution of vision. NeuroImage, 26, 573–580. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.01.047

41.

Renier

Laloyaux

Collignon

Tranduy

Vanlierde

Bruyer

De Volder

A. G.

(2005). The Ponzo illusion with auditory substitution of vision in sighted and early-blind subjects. Perception, 34, 857–867. doi:10.1068/p5219

42.

Siegle

Warren

(2010). Distal attribution and distance perception in sensory substitution. Perception, 39, 208–223. doi:10.1068/p6366

43.

Sur

Garraghty

P. E.

Roe

A. W.

(1988). Experimentally induced visual projections into auditory thalamus and cortex. Science, 242, 1437–1441. doi:10.1126/science.2462279

44.

Venturelli

(2011). Expandiendo el espacio de búsqueda para una ciencia de la conciencia perceptual. Revista Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento, 3(2), 29–43.

45.

Ward

Meijer

(2010). Visual experiences in the blind induced by an auditory sensory substitution device. Consciousness and Cognition, 19, 492–500. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2009.10.006

46.

Ziat

Gapenne

Stewart

Lenay

(2007). Haptic recognition of shapes at different scales: A comparison of two methods of interaction. Interacting with Computers, 19, 121–132. doi:10.1016/j.intcom.2006.07.004