Cornoldi, C.

Latini Corazzini, L.

Mirandola, C.

Schmidt, Susanna

Tinti, Carla

English

Institutional Research Information System University of Turin

Psychologica Belgica2010, 50-3&4, 327-334.Developing spatial knowleDge in the absence  of vision: allocentric anD egocentric  representations generateD by blinD people when supporteD by auDitory cuesLuca Latini Corazzini1, Carla TinTi1, Susanna SChmidT1, Chiara mirandoLa2, & Cesare CornoLdi2 1Dipartimento di Psicologia, Università degli Studi di Torino2Dipartimento di Psicologia, Università degli Studi di PadovaThe study of visuospatial representations and visuospatial memory can profit from the analysis of the performance of specific groups. in particular, the surprising skills and limitations of blind people may be an important source of information. For example, converging evidence indicates that, even though blind individuals are able to develop both egocentric and allocentric space representations, the latter tend to be much more restricted than those in blindfolded sighted individuals. however, no study has explored yet whether this conclusion also holds when people receive practice with the spatial environment and are supported by auditory stimuli. The present research examined these issues with the use of an experimental apparatus based on the morris Water maze (morris et al., 1982). in this setup, blind people and blindfolded controls were given the opportunity to develop knowledge of the environment with the support of simultaneous auditory cues. The results show that even in this favourable case blind people spontaneously maintain to rely on an egocentric spatial representation.introductionWhile interacting with the environment people construct cognitive maps of the space in which they are situated, and the locations of the objects they perceive. The literature on spatial knowledge suggests that the construction of spatial representations involves two different kinds of mapping: allocen-tric and egocentric (Feigenbaum & morris, 2004). Egocentric mapping relies upon the point of view of the person who is moving inside the environment. it is characterised by an internal frame of reference (bodily axis) and ego-centric coordinates such as right, left, ahead, behind. This kind of sequen-tial mapping is especially useful for orientation when the person each time moves from the same starting point. allocentric mapping relies upon the spatial relations among perceptible external cues. it is characterized by an external frame of reference and may produce a sophisticated representation of the space (Thinus-Blanc & Gaunet, 1997). This more global, maplike kind of spatial representation allows people to orient themselves when starting from different positions and to generate novel paths or shortcuts.328 DeveloPing SPaTial knowleDge in The aBSence of viSionThe results of different studies suggest that vision is important for the acquisition of spatial knowledge (e.g. Eimer 2004; Byrne & Salter, 1983). in particular, several studies with blind persons have shown that although the absence of vision does not hinder the creation of spatial representations, these are mainly limited to egocentric representations (Coluccia et al., 2007; Thinus-Blanc & Gaunet, 1997), even though allocentric spatial knowledge is not completely absent in blind people (hill et al., 1993; millar, 1994; mor-rongiello et al., 1995; Passini & Proulx, 1988; Thinus-Blanc & Gaunet, 1997; Tinti et al., 2006). a limitation of the studies showing the reliance on egocentric information in blind people is that they were focused on the spatial abilities associated with the absence of vision, without taking into account the contribution of other factors, such as practice and the support of auditory information, which are available to the blind to the same extent as to the seeing individuals. a recent study by overman et al. (2006) and Cornoldi et al. (2009) specifi-cally addressed this issue by systematically interviewing blind and sighted individuals at the end of a spatial task. The authors found that the differences between the sighted and the blind people were correlated with the type of strategy used, suggesting that the spatial abilities of blind individuals should be studied in contexts where they have enough opportunity to develop the best strategy for solving the task. in this respect, multi-trial learning tasks would seem to be more adequate than single trial tasks to study the spatial abilities of blind people.in addition, in the above studies the participants were not encouraged to develop an overall representation of the environment. in the absence of vi-sion, space can only be experienced sequentially, by successively exploring different locations within the space. only when participants start from dif-ferent locations and are guided by sounds coming from different parts of the space, does it become interesting for them to develop a simultaneous percep-tion of the environment. Therefore, one can wonder whether the preference of the blind for an egocentric representation would still be present when they are offered the possibility to perceive the environment in a synchronic man-ner and to develop stable spatial representations through a series of repeated trials. To examine which space representations blind people create when the space is experienced through a series of trials and with the support of au-ditory stimuli, in the present study we created an experimental apparatus based on the morris Water maze (mWm). The original maze (morris et al., 1982) was developed to study spatial strategies in animals, especially rats, and consisted of a circular swimming pool filled with murky water in which an invisible platform was situated that allowed the animal to rest. The platform is situated in a constant position relative to one or more extramaze 329Corazzini, TinTi, SChmidT, mirandoLa, & CornoLdicues (pictures, doors, windows,…). The rat’s task consists of learning, over a series of trials, the platform’s location in order to be able to escape from the water. if the starting point is constant, the rat can solve the problem by means of an egocentric strategy, learning the sequence of movements necessary to reach the platform. if the starting points are different over the series of trials, the rat is forced to adopt an allocentric strategy, that is to learn the position of the platform with respect to the extramaze cues. in the last decades, various versions of the mWm have been developed for the study of spatial knowledge in humans. Some researchers created vir-tual versions of the water maze (Kallai et al., 2005), others used open space versions consisting of a huge circle with a concealed target, or a pool filled with small plastic balls instead of water for the study of spatial orientation in children (overman et al 1996).For the present research we created a maze with auditory cues to provide frames of reference in the absence of vision and we administered a series of trials to blind and blindfolded participants to address the following questions: – Will the performance of blind and blindfolded sighted persons differ in an allocentric task when the two groups have the possibility to repeatedly explore the environment and to simultaneously perceive external cues? Will sighted persons still be advantaged by their usual experience of si-multaneous perception through vision? – Will blind people still show a benefit in a condition that favours an ego-centric strategy if they have the possibility of developing simultaneous perception based on allocentric cues?methodParticipants Twelve congenitally blind and 12 sighted adults participated in the experi-ment. The group of blind participants consisted of 7 males (mean age: 39.1, SD = 7.9) and 5 females (mean age: 41.4, SD = 12.9). The control group of sighted participants also consisted of 7 males (mean age = 35.9; SD = 6.8) and 5 females (mean age: 34.2, SD = 14.3). The blind participants had no residual sight and no other deficit. Their blindness was due to various aeti-ologies: optic nerve atrophy (n = 3), retrolental fibroplasia (n = 2), congenital glaucoma (n = 3), childbirth trauma (n = 2), congenital cataract (n = 1), and oxygen therapy (n = 1).SettingThe experiment was run in a large room containing a circular space (diam-eter of 4 m) delimited by a metallic net (height = 70 cm). around the circle, 330 DeveloPing SPaTial knowleDge in The aBSence of viSionat equal angular distances (120°), three audio speakers connected to a PC made it possible to generate sounds. inside the circle, a target consisting of an easily perceptible plastic carpet (30 cm ∅) was placed.Experimental design and procedureThe experiment comprised six trials in each of two conditions: egocentric and allocentric, the order of conditions being balanced across the partici-pants. Sighted participants were blindfolded before entering the experimental room. Each participant explored the maze for some minutes in the absence of the target before the beginning of the experiment to familiarize themselves with the experimental apparatus. in each condition, participants had to find the target as quickly as possible. The target was placed at the same position across the six experimental trials.in the egocentric condition, the starting point for the six trials was the same, located at the border of the maze (Figure 1). When the participant had found the target, the experimenter went to him/her, disorientated him/her by means of some clockwise and anticlockwise rotations on a turn chair and brought him/her back at the starting point for the next trial. during the six trials, the three audio speakers displayed the same continuous sound. There-fore participants could orient themselves only on the basis of their body co-ordinates. in the allocentric condition, participants started each trial from one of three different starting points at the border of the maze (Figure 1). From the moment a trial began until the target was found, each of the three audio speakers displayed a distinct continuous sound, the three sounds being easily distinguishable and always the same. once the target was found, the sound tracks were stopped, the participant was disorientated using the turn chair, and then conducted to another starting point for the next trial. Learning was estimated by comparing the time necessary to find the tar-get at the first and the sixth trial. 331Corazzini, TinTi, SChmidT, mirandoLa, & CornoLdiresultsTo compare the training effects of both groups with reference to the two types of cues (ego vs allo), we ran a 2 x 2 x 2 mixed anoVa contrasting the times required for finding the target in the first and the sixth trial. The anoVa showed that experience produced a significant improvement, f (1, 22) = 5.68, mSe = 1873.56, p = .026. Furthermore we found the predicted significant interaction between groups, experience and type of cues, f (1, 22) = 4.56, mSe = 620.43, p = 0 .044. as can be seen in Table 1, the blind showed a substantial practice effect only with the egocentric cues, whereas for the controls the advantage was smaller and similar with the two types of cues. Figure 1. Schematic representation of the experimental setting in the egocentric and in the allocentric condition. The small black circle represents the target.  Results To compare the training effects of both groups with reference to the two types of cues (ego vs allo), we ran a 2 x 2 x 2 mixed ANOVA contrasting the times required for finding the target in the first and the sixth trial. The ANOVA showed that experience produced a significant improvement, F (1, 22) = 5.68, MSe = 1873.56, p = .026. Furthermore we found the predicted significant interaction between groups, experience and type of cues, F (1, 22) = 4.56, MSe = 620.43, p = 0 .044. As can be seen in Table 1, the blind showed a substantial practic  effect only with the egocentric cues, whereas for the controls the advantage was smaller and similar with the two types of cues. Table 1.  A A A BA C 1-6 Egocentric Allocentric 1 and 6 2 and 43 and 5Figure 1.Schematic representation of the experimental setting in the egocentric and in the allocentric conditi . The small black circle repres nts the target332 DeveloPing SPaTial knowleDge in The aBSence of viSiondiscussionresults from previous studies suggested that blind people prefer egocen-tric spatial cues (Coluccia et al., 2007; Thinus-Blanc & Gaunet, 1997) even though blindness does not make the creation of simultaneous, holistic spatial representations on the basis of allocentric cues impossible (hill et al., 1993; millar, 1994; Passini & Proulx, 1988; Thinus-Blanc & Gaunet, 1997; Tinti et al., 2006). This conclusion derived from studies in which the performance of blind and blindfolded sighted persons was compared in single-trial spatial orientation tasks, in which both groups had to rely on sequential spatial ex-ploration to construct holistic representations and, therefore, had no incentive to develop an allocentric representation of the environment. Furthermore, in these studies there were no stationary cues upon which the blind could rely (as may happen in everyday life when for example the sounds of the traffic, the train and the church bells describe the arrangement of a complex spatial layout).The present study aimed to determine what happens when both groups have the possibility to construct spatial representations by using simultane-ously perceived allocentric landmarks. We created a modified version of the morris Water maze in which participants had to find a target using an al-locentric frame of reference constituted by auditory landmarks. moreover, the performance of the blind and the blindfolded sighted participants in this allocentric task was compared to that in a similar task requiring the partici-pants to rely on egocentric cues.our results indicate that, although the task was rather difficult and showed a great variability between subjects, there was a clear practice effect in three conditions: The conditions with the egocentric and the allocentric cues in the Table 1Time (in sec.) needed to reach the target  in the two conditions (ego vs allo)  in blind and sighted participants   Blind Sighted Condition M SD M SD Egocentric  Trial 1  56.25  50.51  46.17  34.58  Trial 6  15.17  17.38  28.33  24.43 allocentric  Trial 1  38.08  39.48  62.83  41.53  Trial 6  35.50  40.41  40.08  47.33333Corazzini, TinTi, SChmidT, mirandoLa, & CornoLdiblindfolded participants, and the egocentric condition in the blind partici-pants. There was no evidence for learning in the allocentric condition with the blind participants. Whereas the greatest improvement was observed in the blind egocentric condition, supporting previous observations of a pref-erence for egocentric representation in blind people (Coluccia et al., 2007; Thinus-Blanc & Gaunet, 1997), no practice effect was observed in the blind allocentric condition, despite the fact that our new experimental setup en-couraged the creation of good allocentric representations. This result sug-gests that the preference for egocentric representations in blind people is rather stable. Presumably the constraints produced by the absence of vision have generated a general attitude in the blind to develop egocentric represen-tations, which is maintained also in the less frequent cases that do favor an allocentric representation.referencesByrne, r. W. & Salter, E. (1983). distance and directions in the cognitive maps of the blind. canadian Journal of Psychology, 37, 293-299.coluccia, e., Mammarella i. c., De Beni, R., ittyerah, M., & cornoldi, c. (2007). Remembering object position in absence of vision: egocentric, allocentric and egocentric decentred frames of reference. Perception, 36, 850-864. Cornoldi, C., Tinti, C., mammarella, i. C., re, a. m., & Varotto, d. (2009). memory for an imagined pathway and strategy effects in sighted and in totally congeni-tally blind individuals. acta Psychologica, 130, 11-16.eimer, M. (2004). Multisensory integration: how visual experience shapes spatial perception. current Biology, 14, 115-117.Feigenbaum, J. d. & morris, r. G. (2004). allocentric versus egocentric spatial memory after unilateral temporal lobectomy in humans. neuropsychology, 18, 462-472.hill, E. W., rieser, J. J., hill, m. m., hill, m., halpin, J., & halpin, r. (1993). how persons with visual impairments explore novel spaces – strategies of good and poor performers. Journal of visual impairment and Blindness, 87, 295-301.Kallai, J., makany, T., Karadi, K., & Jacobs, W. (2005). Spatial orientation strate-gies in Morris-type virtual water task for humans. Behavioural brain research, 159, 187-196.millar, S. (1994). Understanding and representing the space: theory and evidence from studies with blind and sighted children. oxford: University Press.morris, r. G., Garrud, P., rawlins, J. n., & o’Keefe, J. (1982). Place navigation im-paired in rats with hippocampal lesions. nature, 297, 681-683.morrongiello, B. a., Timney, B., humphrey, G. K., anderson, S., & Skory C. (1995). Spatial knowledge in blind and sighted children. Journal of experimental child Psychology, 59, 211-225.overman, W. h., Pate, B. J., moore, K., & Peuster, a. (1996). ontogeny of place learning in children as measured in the radial arm maze, Morris search task, 334 DeveloPing SPaTial knowleDge in The aBSence of viSionand open field task. Behavioral neuroscience, 110, 1205-1228.Passini, r. & Proulx, G. (1988). wayfinding without vision: an experiment with con-genitally, totally blind people. environment and Behaviour, 20, 227-252.Thinus-Blanc, C. & Gaunet, F. (1997). Representation of space in blind persons: vi-sion as a spatial sense? Psychological Bulletin, 121, 20-42.Tinti, C., adenzato, m., Tamietto, m., & Cornoldi, C. (2006). visual experience is not necessary for efficient survey spatial cognition: evidence from blindness. Quarterly Journal of experimental Psychology, 59, 1306-1328.

Developing spatial knowledge in the absence of vision: allocentric and egocentric representations generated by blind people when supported by auditory cues

https://iris.unito.it/retrieve/handle/2318/132942/11311/LatiniCorazzini_2010.pdf

Developing spatial knowledge in the absence of vision: allocentric and egocentric representations generated by blind people when supported by auditory cues

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Institutional Research Information System University of Turin