Literature DB >> 8474833

Comparison of nine methods of indicating the direction to objects: data from blind adults.

L Haber1, R N Haber, S Penningroth, K Novak, H Radgowski.   

Abstract

Nine methods of indicating the direction to object locations were tested on twenty blind adult subjects. The task was to indicate the location of active auditory targets distributed in a semicircle with a 1.7 m radius around the subject. Target location, practice, and feedback were systematically varied for each method. The greatest accuracy and lowest variability were found for pointing methods that used body parts (directing the nose at the target, facing it with the chest, and pointing with the index finger) and extensions of body parts (pointing with a hand-held cane or with a short stick). Two less accurate methods involved rotating a dial. The least accurate methods involved drawing and a verbal description in terms of clockface labels. Method interacted significantly with target location, and with individual differences. In general, the body-part and extension method were affected less than other methods by target location and individual differences. The findings suggest that a pointing response that uses body part or an extension of a body part is the best choice for experimental or diagnostic measurement of object location by blind subjects. Differences between the results of this study of blind subjects and auditory localization accuracy in sighted subjects are discussed, and the implications for spatial processing in the blind are considered.

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8474833     DOI: 10.1068/p220035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Perception        ISSN: 0301-0066            Impact factor:   1.490


  12 in total

1.  Misperception of exocentric directions in auditory space.

Authors:  Joeanna C Arthur; John W Philbeck; Jesse Sargent; Stephen Dopkins
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2008-06-13

2.  Where did that noise come from? Memory for sound locations is exceedingly eccentric both in front and in rear space.

Authors:  Franco Delogu; Phillip McMurray
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2019-06-13

3.  Rapid identification of sound direction in blind footballers.

Authors:  Takumi Mieda; Masahiro Kokubu; Mayumi Saito
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2019-10-18       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Encoding, learning, and spatial updating of multiple object locations specified by 3-D sound, spatial language, and vision.

Authors:  Roberta L Klatzky; Yvonne Lippa; Jack M Loomis; Reginald G Golledge
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2002-12-19       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  3-D localization of virtual sound sources: effects of visual environment, pointing method, and training.

Authors:  Piotr Majdak; Matthew J Goupell; Bernhard Laback
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  Benefits of active listening during 3D sound localization.

Authors:  V Gaveau; A Coudert; R Salemme; E Koun; C Desoche; E Truy; A Farnè; F Pavani
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2022-09-07       Impact factor: 2.064

7.  The role of spatial memory and frames of reference in the precision of angular path integration.

Authors:  Joeanna C Arthur; John W Philbeck; Nicholas J Kleene; David Chichka
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2012-08-09

8.  Large manual pointing errors, but accurate verbal reports, for indications of target azimuth.

Authors:  John Philbeck; Jesse Sargent; Joeanna Arthur; Steve Dopkins
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 1.490

9.  Response actions influence the categorization of directions in auditory space.

Authors:  Marcella C C Velten; Bettina E Bläsing; Thomas Hermann; Constanze Vorwerg; Thomas Schack
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-08-07

10.  The influence of vision on sound localization abilities in both the horizontal and vertical planes.

Authors:  Vanessa Tabry; Robert J Zatorre; Patrice Voss
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-12-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.