ArticlePloS one2024
Adults' spatial scaling of tactile maps: Insights from studying sighted, early and late blind individuals.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- International prevalence of tactile map usage and its impact on navigational independence and well-being of people with visual impairments.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The current study investigated spatial scaling of tactile maps among blind adults and blindfolded sighted controls. We were specifically interested in identifying spatial scaling strategies as well as effects of different scaling directions (up versus down) on participants' performance. To this aim, we asked late blind participants (with visual memory, Experiment 1) and early blind participants (without visual memory, Experiment 2) as well as sighted blindfolded controls to encode a map including a target and to place a response disc at the same spot on an empty, constant-sized referent space. Maps had five different sizes resulting in five scaling factors (1:3, 1:2, 1:1, 2:1, 3:1), allowing to investigate different scaling directions (up and down) in a single, comprehensive design. Accuracy and speed of learning about the target location as well as responding served as dependent variables. We hypothesized that participants who can use visual mental representations (i.e., late blind and blindfolded sighted participants) may adopt mental transformation scaling strategies. However, our results did not support this hypothesis. At the same time, we predicted the usage of relative distance scaling strategies in early blind participants, which was supported by our findings. Moreover, our results suggested that tactile maps can be scaled as accurately and even faster by blind participants than by sighted participants. Furthermore, irrespective of the visual status, participants of each visual status group gravitated their responses towards the center of the space. Overall, it seems that a lack of visual imagery does not impair early blind adults' spatial scaling ability but causes them to use a different strategy than sighted and late blind individuals.
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.