ArticlePloS one2021
A self-training program for sensory substitution devices.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early acquisition efficiency in visual-to-auditory sensory substitution: the role of structured learning.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Navigation Training for Persons With Visual Disability Through Multisensory Assistive Technology: Mixed Methods Experimental Study.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2024Article
- Cross-modal correspondence enhances elevation localization in visual-to-auditory sensory substitution.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Shape detection beyond the visual field using a visual-to-auditory sensory augmentation device.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- Article
- A case study in phenomenology of visual experience with retinal prosthesis versus visual-to-auditory sensory substitution.Neuropsychologia · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sensory Substitution Devices (SSDs) convey visual information through audition or touch, targeting blind and visually impaired individuals. One bottleneck towards adopting SSDs in everyday life by blind users, is the constant dependency on sighted instructors throughout the learning process. Here, we present a proof-of-concept for the efficacy of an online self-training program developed for learning the basics of the EyeMusic visual-to-auditory SSD tested on sighted blindfolded participants. Additionally, aiming to identify the best training strategy to be later re-adapted for the blind, we compared multisensory vs. unisensory as well as perceptual vs. descriptive feedback approaches. To these aims, sighted participants performed identical SSD-stimuli identification tests before and after ~75 minutes of self-training on the EyeMusic algorithm. Participants were divided into five groups, differing by the feedback delivered during training: auditory-descriptive, audio-visual textual description, audio-visual perceptual simultaneous and interleaved, and a control group which had no training. At baseline, before any EyeMusic training, participants SSD objects' identification was significantly above chance, highlighting the algorithm's intuitiveness. Furthermore, self-training led to a significant improvement in accuracy between pre- and post-training tests in each of the four feedback groups versus control, though no significant difference emerged among those groups. Nonetheless, significant correlations between individual post-training success rates and various learning measures acquired during training, suggest a trend for an advantage of multisensory vs. unisensory feedback strategies, while no trend emerged for perceptual vs. descriptive strategies. The success at baseline strengthens the conclusion that cross-modal correspondences facilitate learning, given SSD algorithms are based on such correspondences. Additionally, and crucially, the results highlight the feasibility of self-training for the first stages of SSD learning, and suggest that for these initial stages, unisensory training, easily implemented also for blind and visually impaired individuals, may suffice. Together, these findings will potentially boost the use of SSDs for rehabilitation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.