The aim of this study is to examine the ability of children and adolescents with visual impairments to code and represent near space. Moreover, it examines the impact of the strategies they use and individual differences in their performance. A total of 30 individuals with visual impairments up to the age of 18 were given eight different object patterns in different arrays and were asked to code and represent each of them. The results revealed better performances by those who use an allocentric approach during spatial coding and those with residual vision. In fact, allocentric strategies were more prevalent in coding near space than egocentric ones. Moreover, the ability of participants to move independently was positively correlated with their ability to use the most effective haptic strategies. These findings suggest that children and adolescents with visual impairments are capable of using allocentric reference and providing a different perspective to the currently dominant one.
ArterC.MasonH. L.McCallS.McLindenM.StoneJ. (1999). Children with visual impairment in mainstream settings. London, UK: David Fulton.
2.
BishopV. E. (2004). Teaching visually impaired children. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.
3.
CattaneoZ.VecchiT.CornoldiC.MammarellaI.BoninoD.RicciardiE.PietriniP. (2008). Imagery and spatial processes in blindness and visual impairment. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 32, 1346–1360.
4.
FiehlerK.ReuschelJ.RöslerF. (2009). Early non-visual experience influences proprioceptive-spatial discrimination acuity in adulthood. Neuropsychologia, 47, 897–906.
5.
HarrelF. E. (2002). Regression modeling strategies: With applications to linear models, logistic regression, and survival analysis. New York, NY: Springer.
6.
HegartyM.MontelloD. R.RichardsonA. E.IshikawaT.LovelaceK. (2006). Spatial abilities at different scales: Individual differences in aptitude-test performance and spatial-layout learning. Intelligence, 34, 151–176.
7.
HellerM. (1989). Picture and pattern perception in the sighted and the blind: The advantage of late blind. Perception, 18, 379–389.
8.
HellerM. A.BrackettD. D.ScroggsE.AllenA. C. (2001). Haptic perception of the horizontal by blind and low-vision individuals. Perception, 30, 601–610.
9.
HellerM. A.WilsonK.SteffenH.YoneyamaK. (2003). Superior haptic perceptual selectivity in late-blind and very-low-vision subjects. Perception, 32, 499–511.
10.
HollinsM. (1985). Styles of mental imagery in blind adults. Neuropsychologia, 23, 561–566.
11.
HollinsM.KelleyK. E. (1988). Spatial updating in blind and sighted people. Perception & Psychophysics, 43, 380–388.
12.
HuttenlocherJ.PressonC. C. (1973). Mental rotation and the perspective problem. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 277–299.
13.
KappersM. L. A. (2007). Haptic space processing—Allocentric and egocentric reference frames. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 208–218.
14.
LoomisM. J.KlatzkyL. R.LedermanJ. S. (1991). Similarity of tactual and visual picture recognition with limited field of view. Perception, 20, 167–177.
15.
MillarS. (1976). Spatial representation by blind and sighted children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 21, 460–479.
16.
MillarS. (1979). The utilization of external and movement cues in simple spatial tasks by blind and sighted children. Perception, 8, 11–20.
17.
MillarS. (1988). Models of sensory deprivation: The nature/nurture dichotomy and spatial representation in the blind. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 11(1), 69–87.
18.
MillarS.Al-AttarZ. (2005). What aspects of vision facilitate haptic processing?Brain and Cognition, 59, 258–268.
19.
MonegatoM.CattaneoZ.PeceA.VecchiT. (2007). Comparing the effects of congenital and late visual impairments on visuospatial mental abilities. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 101(5), 278–295.
20.
MorsleyK.SpencerB.BaybuttK. (1991). Is there any relationship between a child’s body image and spatial skills?British Journal of Visual Impairment, 9(2), 41–43.
21.
MouW.FanY.McNamaraP. T.OwenB. C. (2008). Intrinsic frames of reference and egocentric viewpoints in scene recognition. Cognition, 106, 750–769.
22.
MouW.McNamaraP. T.ValiquetteM. C.RumpB. (2004). Allocentric and egocentric updating of spatial memories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(1), 142–157.
23.
NardiniM.BurgessN.BreckenridgeK.AtkinsonJ. (2006). Differential developmental trajectories for egocentric, environmental and intrinsic frames of reference in spatial memory. Cognition, 101, 153–172.
24.
NewellF. N.WoodsA. T.MernaghM.BülthoffH. H. (2005). Visual, haptic and crossmodal recognition of scenes. Experimental Brain Research, 161, 233–242.
25.
NewportR.RabbB.JacksonR. S. (2002). Noninformative vision improves haptic spatial perception. Current Biology, 12, 1661–1664.
26.
OchaitaE.HuertasJ. A. (1993). Spatial representation by persons who are blind: A study. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 87(2), 37–41.
27.
PaivioA. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
28.
PapadopoulosK.GoudirasD. (2005). Accessibility assistance for visually impaired people in digital texts. British Journal of Visual Impairment, 23(2), 75–83.
29.
PasqualottoA.NewellN. F. (2007). The role of visual experience on the representation and updating of novel haptic scenes. Brain and Cognition, 65, 184–194.
30.
PickH. L.Jr. (2004). Mental maps, psychology of. In BaltesP. B.SmelserN. J. (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (pp. 9681–9683). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
31.
PogrundR.HealyG.JonesK.LevackN.Martin-CurryS.MartinezC.. . .VrbaA. (1995). Teaching age-appropriate purposeful skills: An orientation and mobility curriculum for students with visual impairments (2nd ed.). Austin: Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired.
32.
PonchilliaE. P.PonchilliaV. S. (1996). Foundations of rehabilitation teaching with persons who are blind or visually impaired. New York, NY: American Foundation for the Blind Press.
33.
PostmaA.ZuidhoekS.NoordzijM. L.KappersA. M. L. (2007). Differences between early-blind, late-blind, and blindfolded-sighted people in haptic spatial-configuration learning and resulting memory traces. Perception, 36, 1253–1265.
34.
PostmaA.ZuidhoekS.NoordzijM. L.KappersA. M. L. (2008). Haptic orientation perception benefits from visual experience: Evidence from early-blind, late-blind, and sighted people. Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 1197–1206.
35.
SpencerC.BladesM.MorsleyK. (1989). The child in the physical environment: The development of spatial knowledge and cognition. New York, NY: John Wiley.
36.
UngarS.BladesM.SpencerC. (1995). Mental rotation of a tactile layout by young visually impaired children. Perception, 24, 891–900.
37.
VanlierdeA.Wanet-DefalqueM.-C. (2004). Abilities and strategies of blind and sighted subjects in visuo-spatial imagery. Acta Psychologica, 116, 205–222.
38.
WallerD.LippaY.RichardsonA. (2008). Isolating observer-based reference directions in human spatial memory: Head, body, and self-to-array axis. Cognition, 106, 157–183.
39.
WangR. F. (2003). Spatial representations and spatial updating. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 42, 109–155.
40.
WarrenD. H. (1994). Blindness and children: An individual differences approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
41.
WebsterA.RoeJ. (1998). Children with visual impairments: Social interaction, language and learning. London, UK: Routledge.
42.
WinnW. (1991). Learning from maps and diagrams. Educational Psychology Review, 3, 211–247.
