Advertisement

Tactile Maps and a Test of the Conjoint Retention Hypothesis

  • Simon Ungar
  • Mark Blades
  • Christopher Spencer

Abstract

Kulhavy and his colleagues found that when a map and related factual information were learned together, the probability of recalling the factual information was greater than when information was learned without a map, or with a list of place names. They account for this finding with their “conjoint retention” hypothesis - a corollary of Paivio’s “dual coding” theory. The present study extended this research by including a group of blind and visually impaired participants who learned a tactile map. Twelve blind and visually impaired participants and forty-eight sighted participants learned either a map (map condition) or a list of place names (list condition) for either 10 minutes or 2 minutes and then heard a text describing places on the map/list. After a filled pause, participants were asked to recall information from the text and, in the map condition, to make a reconstruction of the map. Kulhavy’s original finding was replicated for sighted participants who studied the map/list for 10 minutes. However, sighted participants exposed to the map/list for 2 minutes and blind participants performed at the same level with both the map and with the list. In all cases, differences between conditions were small. Further analyses revealed that encoding of the map’s structure, a crucial variable in Kulhavy’s model, may not have been a major factor in determining recall of factual information.

Keywords

Mental Rotation Mental Image List Condition Blind People Impaired People 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abel, R.R. and Kulhavy, R.W. (1986). Maps, mode of text presentation, and children’s prose learning. American Educational Research Journal 23:263–274.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Andrews, S.K. (1983). Spatial cognition through tactual maps. In Proceedings of the 1st international symposium on maps and graphics for the visually handicapped. Washington, DC: Association of American Geographers.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bentzen, B.L. (1982). Tangible graphic displays in the education of the blind persons. In W. Schiff and E. Foulke (Eds), Tactual perception: A sourcebook. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blades, M., Ungar, S. and Spencer, C. (in press). Map using by adults with visual impairments. Professional Geographer.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carpenter, P.A. and Eisenberg, P. (1978). Mental rotation and frame of reference in blind and sighted individuals. Perception and Psychophysics 23:117–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dodds, A. (1983). Mental rotation and visual imagery. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness 77:16–20.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dodds, A. (1988). Tactile maps and the blind user: Perceptual, cognitive and behavioural factors. In Proceedings of the 2nd international symposium on tactile maps and graphics for visually impaired people. Nottingham: Nottingham University Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ernest, C.H. (1987). Imagery and memory in the blind: A review. In McDaniel and Pressley (Eds), Imagery and related processes. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Espinosa, M-A., Ungar, S., Ochata, E., Blades, M. and Spencer, C. (1998). Comparing methods for introducing blind and visually impaired people to unfamiliar urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology 18:277–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Farah, M. (1984). The neurological basis of mental imagery: A componential analysis. Cognition 18:245–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hampson, P.J. and Daly, C.M. (1989). Individual variation in tactile map reading skills: some guidelines for research. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness 83:505–509.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Heller, M.A. (1991). Haptic perception in blind people. In M. Heller and W. Schiff (Eds), The psychology of touch. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Juurmaa, J. (1973). Transposition in mental spatial manipulation: A theoretical analysis. American Foundation for the Blind Research Bulletin 26:87–134.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kerr, N.H. (1983). The role of vision in “visual imagery” experiments: Evidence from the congenitally blind. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 112:265–277.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kulhavy, R.W., Lee, J.B. and Caterino, L.C. (1985). Conjoint retention of maps and related discourse. Contemporary Educational Psychology 10:28–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kulhavy, R.W. and Stock, W.A. (1996). How cognitive maps are learned and remembered. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 86:123–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kulhavy, R.W., Stock, W.A. and Kealy, W.A. (1993). How geographic maps increase recall of instructional text. Educational Technology Research and Development 41:47–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kulhavy, R.W., Stock, W.A., Verdi, M.P., Rittschof, K.A. and Savenye, W. (1993). Why maps improve memory for text: The influence of structural information on working memory operations. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 5:375–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kulhavy, R.W., Woodward, K.A., Haygood, R.C. and Webb, J.M. (1993c). Using maps to remember text: An instructional analysis. British Journal of Educational Psychology 63:161–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Landau, B. (1986). Early map use as an unlearned ability. Cognition 22:201223.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Marmor, G.S. and Zaback, L.A. (1976). Mental rotation by the blind: Does mental rotation depend on visual imagery? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2:515–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Millar, S. (1994). Understanding and representing space: Theory and evidence from studies with blind and sighted children. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Paivio (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Röder, B., Rösler, F., Heilund, M. and Hennighausen, E. (1993). Haptic mental rotation tasks performed by blind and sighted individuals. Zeitschrift Für Experimentelle and Angewandte Psychologie 40:154–177.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schwartz, N.H. and Kulhavy, R.W. (1981). Map features and the recall of discourse. Contemporary Educational Psychology 6:151–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Senden, S.M.v. (1932). Space and sight: The perception of space and shape in the congenitally blind before and after operation. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stock, W.A., Kulhavy, R.W., Peterson, S.E., Hancock, T.E. and Verdi, M.P. (1995). Mental representations of maps and verbal descriptions: Evidence they may affect text memory differently. Contemporary Educational Psychology 20:237–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tippett, L.J. (1992). The generation of visual images: A review of neuropsychological research and theory. Psychological Bulletin 112:415–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ungar, S. (in press). Cognitive mapping without visual experience. In R. Kitchin and S. Freundschuh (Eds), Cognitive mapping: Past, present and future. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ungar, S., Blades, M., Spencer, C. and Morsley, K. (1994). Can visually impaired children use tactile maps to estimate directions? Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness 88:221–233.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ungar, S.J., Blades, M. and Spencer, C. (1995). Mental rotation of a tactile layout by young visually impaired children. Perception 24:891–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ungar, S., Blades, M. and Spencer, C. (1996). The construction of cognitive maps by children with visual impairments. In J. Portugali (Ed.), The construction of cognitive maps. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ungar, S., Espinosa, A., Blades, M., Ochata, E. and Spencer, C. (1997). Use of tactile maps by blind and visually impaired people. Cartographic Perspectives 28:4–12.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ungar, S., Blades, M. and Spencer, C. (1997). Strategies for knowledge acquisition from cartographic maps by blind and visually impaired adults. Cartographic Journal 34:93–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Warren, D.H. (1984). Blindness and early childhood development. New York: American Foundation for the Blind.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Winn, W. (1991). Learning from maps and diagrams. Educational Psychology Review 3:211–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simon Ungar
  • Mark Blades
  • Christopher Spencer

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations