Subjects (N=72) studied the braille or Fishburne alphabet for eight minutes and were then tested for recall. More of the Fishburne than of the braille items were recalled, independent of the arrangement of the items. An implication for instructing visually impaired people is discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CatonH., PesterE., & GoldblattS. (1979). Specifications for selecting vocabulary and teaching methods for beginning readers.New York: American Foundation for the Blind.
2.
FoulkeE. (1982). Reading braille. In SchiffW., & FoulkeE. (Eds.), Tactual perception A sourcebook.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3.
HarleyR K., HendersonF.M., & TruanM.B. (1979). The teaching of braille reading.Springfield, IL: Thomas.
4.
LoomisJ.M. (1982). Analysis of tactile and visual confusion matrices.Perception and Psychophysics, 31, 41–52.
5.
LoomisJ.M., & LedermanS.J. (1986). Tactual perception. In BoffK., KaufmanL., & ThomasJ. (Eds.), Handbook of perception and performance.New York: Wiley.
6.
LorimerP. (1982). The braille code and the teaching of braille reading: An annotated bibliography.London: Royal National Institute for the Blind.
7.
NewmanS.E., & HallAD. (1985). Some factors affecting numerosity judgments in haptically-examined braille symbols. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, Boston.
8.
NewmanS.E., HallA.D., & GuptaV. (1983). Immediate memory for visually- and haptically-examined braille symbols. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, San Diego.
9.
OlsonM.R. (1981). Guidelines and games for teaching efficient braille reading.New York: American Foundation for the Blind.
10.
ShafrathM.R. (1986). An alternative to braille.journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 11, 955–956.
11.
YoungP.S. (1979). A new alphabet for the blind.The Record, 42.
