Cited by 247Tactile and Sensory InteractionsMultisensory perception and integrationHallucinations in medical conditions

Visual experiences in the blind induced by an auditory sensory substitution device

Open access
Ward, Jamie, Meijer, Peter·2010·Consciousness and Cognition

Abstract

In this report, the phenomenology of two blind users of a sensory substitution device - "The vOICe" - that converts visual images to auditory signals is described. The users both report detailed visual phenomenology that developed within months of immersive use and has continued to evolve over a period of years. This visual phenomenology, although triggered through use of The vOICe, is likely to depend not only on online visualization of the auditory signal but also on the users' previous (albeit distant) experience of veridical vision (e.g. knowledge of shapes and visual perspective). Once established, the sensory substitution mapping between the auditory and visual domains is not confined to when the device is worn and, thus, may constitute an example of acquired synaesthesia.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.concog.2009.10.006

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Externalization with the haptic stimulator array only occurred for observers who actively trained with the device.

    “Note importantly, that this only occurred for observers who actively trained with the device, consistent with the findings of Maravita et al. (2001, 2003; see also discussion in Proulx et al., 2008; Ward & Meijer, 2010; Bach-Y-Rita & Kercel, 2003; Stiles, Zheng & Shimojo, 2015).”

    From Designing sensory-substitution devices: Principles, pitfalls and potential1 (2016) · cites this paper as Ward & Meijer, 2010

  • A user of the vOICe SSD exclaimed "It is sight!" about their experiences with auditory feedback.

    “Ward and Meijer (2010) reported that a user of the vOICe SSD exclaimed “It is sight!” about their experiences with auditory feedback.”

    From Designing sensory-substitution devices: Principles, pitfalls and potential1 (2016) · cites this paper as Ward and Meijer (2010)

  • Later, following training for several months or even years, they experienced smooth movement, and depth, although the SSD did not convey this type of information.

    “Later, following training for several months or even years, they experienced smooth movement, and depth, although the SSD did not convey this type of information.”

    From Designing sensory-substitution devices: Principles, pitfalls and potential1 (2016) · cites this paper as Ward and Meijer (2010)

  • At first, both users reported that visual details provided by the device were weak, flat and monochrome.

    “At first, both users reported that visual details provided by the device were weak, flat and monochrome.”

    From Designing sensory-substitution devices: Principles, pitfalls and potential1 (2016) · cites this paper as Ward and Meijer (2010)

  • One participant reported seeing color, but this probably reflected the participants' memory of color.

    “One participant even reported seeing color, but this probably reflected the participants’ memory of color (the participant became blind at 21).”

    From Designing sensory-substitution devices: Principles, pitfalls and potential1 (2016) · cites this paper as Ward and Meijer (2010)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ward, J., & Meijer, P.
Affiliations
University of Sussex (GB)
Corresponding author
Ward, Jamie
Venue
Consciousness and Cognition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-03
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
492-500
ISSN
1053-8100 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2127751554
Cited by
247
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 12
FWCI
4.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Consciousness and Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hallucinations in medical conditions
Keywords
sensory substitution, The Voice, visual phenomenology, blind users, cross-modal perception
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Auditory Perception, Blindness, Brain, Cognition, Female, Humans, Imagination, Functional Laterality, Middle Aged, Neuronal Plasticity, Sensory Aids, Sensory Deprivation, Software Design, Visual Acuity, Visual Cortex, Visual Perception, Touch Perception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review