↓ Skip to main content

Sensorimotor strategies for recognizing geometrical shapes: a comparative study with different sensory substitution devices

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Sensorimotor strategies for recognizing geometrical shapes: a comparative study with different sensory substitution devices
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00679
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fernando Bermejo, Ezequiel A. Di Paolo, Mercedes X. Hüg, Claudia Arias

Abstract

The sensorimotor approach proposes that perception is constituted by the mastery of lawful sensorimotor regularities or sensorimotor contingencies (SMCs), which depend on specific bodily characteristics and on actions possibilities that the environment enables and constrains. Sensory substitution devices (SSDs) provide the user information about the world typically corresponding to one sensory modality through the stimulation of another modality. We investigate how perception emerges in novice adult participants equipped with vision-to-auditory SSDs while solving a simple geometrical shape recognition task. In particular, we examine the distinction between apparatus-related SMCs (those originating mostly in properties of the perceptual system) and object-related SMCs (those mostly connected with the perceptual task). We study the sensorimotor strategies employed by participants in three experiments with three different SSDs: a minimalist head-mounted SSD, a traditional, also head-mounted SSD (the vOICe) and an enhanced, hand-held echolocation device. Motor activity and fist-person data are registered and analyzed. Results show that participants are able to quickly learn the necessary skills to distinguish geometric shapes. Comparing the sensorimotor strategies utilized with each SSD we identify differential features of the sensorimotor patterns attributable mostly to the device, which account for the emergence of apparatus-based SMCs. These relate to differences in sweeping strategies between SSDs. We identify, also, components related to the emergence of object-related SMCs. These relate mostly to exploratory movements around the border of a shape. The study provides empirical support for SMC theory and discusses considerations about the nature of perception in sensory substitution.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 2 4%
Argentina 1 2%
Unknown 52 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Student > Master 10 18%
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Other 11 20%
Unknown 7 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 31%
Neuroscience 7 13%
Engineering 7 13%
Computer Science 5 9%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 10 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 August 2021.
All research outputs
#6,317,221
of 23,479,361 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#9,050
of 31,311 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,618
of 267,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#189
of 527 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,479,361 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,311 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,854 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 527 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.