ArticleCognitive science2025
Gestural and Verbal Evidence of Conceptual Representation Differences in Blind and Sighted Individuals.
Article in Cognitive science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Visuospatial experience shapes the form of gestures: Blind speakers gesture with more precise spatial tracking of motion than sighted speakers.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
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
This preregistered study examined whether visual experience influences conceptual representations by examining both gestural expression and feature listing. Gestures-mostly driven by analog mappings of visuospatial and motoric experiences onto the body-offer a unique window into conceptual representations and provide complementary information not offered by language-based features, which have been the focus of previous work. Thirty congenitally or early blind and 30 sighted Turkish speakers produced silent gestures and features for concepts from semantic categories that differentially rely on experience in visual (non-manipulable objects and animals) and motor (manipulable objects) information. Blind individuals were less likely than sighted individuals to produce gestures for non-manipulable objects and animals, but not for manipulable objects. Overall, the tendency to use a particular gesture strategy for specific semantic categories was similar across groups. However, blind participants relied less on drawing and personification strategies depicting visuospatial aspects of concepts than sighted participants. Feature-listing revealed that blind participants share considerable conceptual knowledge with sighted participants, but their understanding differs in fine-grained details, particularly for animals. Thus, while concepts appear broadly similar in blind and sighted individuals, this study reveals nuanced differences, too, highlighting the intricate role of visual experience in conceptual representations.
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.