Cited by 110Tactile and Sensory InteractionsMultisensory perception and integrationSpatial Cognition and Navigation

Differences between Early-Blind, Late-Blind, and Blindfolded-Sighted People in Haptic Spatial-Configuration Learning and Resulting Memory Traces

Open access
Postma, Albert, Zuidhoek, Sander, Noordzij, Matthijs L, Kappers, Astrid M L·2007·Perception

Abstract

The roles of visual and haptic experience in different aspects of haptic processing of objects in peripersonal space are examined. In three trials, early-blind, late-blind, and blindfolded-sighted individuals had to match ten shapes haptically to the cut-outs in a board as fast as possible. Both blind groups were much faster than the sighted in all three trials. All three groups improved considerably from trial to trial. In particular, the sighted group showed a strong improvement from the first to the second trial. While superiority of the blind remained for speeded matching after rotation of the stimulus frame, coordinate positional-memory scores in a non-speeded free-recall trial showed no significant differences between the groups. Moreover, when assessed with a verbal response, categorical spatial-memory appeared strongest in the late-blind group. The role of haptic and visual experience thus appears to depend on the task aspect tested.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1068/p5441

Cites

36 of 36 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?

  • The study by Postma et al. [59] indicates that sighted blindfolded participants would exhibit worse spatial learning and spatial memory when compared to participants who are blind.

    “This finding correlates with the study by Postma et al. [59], which indicates that the sighted blindfolded participants would exhibit worse spatial learning and spatial memory when compared to participants who are blind.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Postma, A., Zuidhoek, S., Noordzij, M. L., & Kappers, A. M. L.
Affiliations
  • Utrecht University (NL)
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Corresponding author
Postma, Albert
Venue
Perception
Published
2007-08
Volume
36
Issue
8
Pages
1253-1265
ISSN
  • 0301-0066 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-4233
OpenAlex
W2096915483
Cited by
110
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 7
FWCI
2.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Perception (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
Keywords
visual impairment, blindness, haptic perception, spatial memory, peripersonal space, visual experience, haptic experience, positional memory, free recall
MeSH terms
Adult, Blindness, Cognition, Depth Perception, Female, Form Perception, Humans, Male, Memory, Middle Aged, Occupations, Psychophysics, Sensory Deprivation, Stereognosis, Time Factors, Chi-Square Distribution

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