See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232221348

Mental Rotation Ability of Individuals with

Visual Impairments

Article in Journal of visual impairment & blindness · September 2010

CITATIONS READS

10 45

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Project Title: Specification of symbols used on audio-tactile maps for individuals with blindness.
Lifelong Learning Program (LLP) – KA3-ICT MULTILATERAL PROJECTS. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Konstantinos Papadopoulos on 18 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
Gerardo Echeita, Ph.D., profesor titular,
Departamento Intetfacultativo de Psicolog(a
Evolutiva y de la Educaci6n, Facultad de
Formiaci6n de Profesorado y Educaci6n,
UniversidadAuO6norna de Madrid, Spain; e-mail:
<gerardo.echeita@uan.es>. Maria Sandoval,
Ph.D., profesora ayudante doctor, Departanzento
Intetfacultativo de Psicologfa Evolutiva y de la
Educaci6n, Facultad de Formaci6n de
Profesoradoy Edecaci6n, UniversidadAut6notna
tie Madrid, Spain; e-mail: <maria.sandoval@
itam.es>. Mauricio LUpez, M.S., research
assistant, Universidad Aut6noma de Madrid,
Spain; e-mail: <mauricio.lopez@uam.es>.
Mental Rotation Ability
of Individuals with Visual
Impairments
Eleni Koustriava
and Konstantinos Papadopoulos
The term mental rotation refers to a mental
process during which individuals "encode the
spatial information into an image, rotate the
image mentally, and then access the image in
its new orientation" (Warren, 1994, pp. 107-
108). Spatial perspective taking is based on a
mental rotation process of the self. In spatial
perspective taking, individuals seem to rotate
themselves mentally into others' orientation to
adopt their spatial perspective (Kessler &
Thomson, 2010).
The mental representation of space is es-
sentially visual (Huttenlocher & Presson,
1973), and some of its aspects, such as per-
spective, are considered to be visually ac-
quired (Arditi, Holtzman, & Kosslyn, 1988).
However, there is another point of view ac-
cording to which mental representation, even
perspective (Heller et al., 2002), neither re-
suits from nor reflects visual perception (Mil-
lar, 1976). Paivio (1986) suggested that im-
agery can result from every sensory modality.
Some studies have underlined the force of
touch in specific tasks, by which individuals
with visual impairments performed as well as
or even better than their sighted counterparts
(Heller, 1.989; Heller, Brackett, Scroggs, &
570 Journalof Visual impairMent & Blindness, September 2010
Allen, 2001; Noordzij, Zuidhoek, & Postma,
2007).
Various studies have been conducted to
evaluate mental rotation (Carpenter & Eisen-
berg, 1978; Dulin & Hatwell, 2006; Marmor
& Zaback, 1976) and perspective taking (Mil-
lar, 1976) in individuals with visual impair-
ments. The results suggested that visual im-
agery facilitates the performance of a mental
rotation task (rotation of either an object or of
the self).
The aims of the study presented here were
to examine the mental rotation ability of in-
dividuals with visual impairments and the
effect of visual status, gender, and chrono-
logical age on this ability. For this purpose,
two tests were conducted-the clock test
and the room test. The first test was in
essence a perspective task (Huttenlocher &
Presson, 1973), and the second test was a
mental manipulation task (Penrod & Petrosko,
2003). However, because both tests require
conceptually difficult mental rotations (Mil-
lar., 1976), we refer to them both as mental
rotation tests.
METHOD
Participants
In our study, we followed the ethical principles
of the Declaration of Helsinki. In addition,
we obtained consent froom the participants
using the appropriate forms and according
to the procedure suggested by the World
Medical Association.
Twenty-eight individuals with congenital
visual impairments were selected, 15 boys
and 13 girls, aged 6 years, 8 months, to 18
years (M = 12.37). The sample was randomly
selected, and none of the participants had
additional disabilities. Of the 28, 14 partici-
pants, aged 6 years, 8 months, to 17 years,
were totally blind (from birth or prior to age
3) or had only light perception (M = 11.90),
and 14 participants aged 8 years, 6 months, to
18 years, had residual vision (M = 12.85).
The visual acuity of the participants with
02010 AFB, All Rights Reserved
 A 12 B 12
a ,,2.1
t• 9
I .7.5
Figure 1. Materials that were used in the clock test.
residual vision was better than 20/400 and
worse than 20/200, and their central func-
tional visual fields were better than 20 de-
grees (binocularly), examined through a con-
frontation method using a pen light.
Materialsand design
Three white cardboard squares measuring
25 x 25 centimeters (or about 10 x 10 inches)
were used in the first test. In the center of the
first square, a fixed, constant indicator made
of black sandpaper was placed in a similar
direction to that of a clock hand pointing to
number 6 (see Figure 1, section a). Similarly,
in the center of the second square, there was
a fixed, constant indicator that pointed toward
the clock position between numbers 7 and 8
(see Figure 1, section b) (hereafter position 6
and position 7.5). In the center of the third
square there was an indicator that was fixed
with a metal nail in such a way that it could be
turned (see Figure 1, section c).
Procedure
Each participant was examined individually
in a quiet room. The researcher explained
every detail in the process that should be
followed for performing the two tests. A
short period (5 minutes) followed, so the
participant could be familiarized with the
process.
In the first test (the clock test) the partic-
ipants' ability to redefine the direction of an
indicator from a different place of observa-
02010 AFB, All Rights Reserved
C
I
3M
.. ...
4
tion was examined. This test is similar to
others that have been used in previous §tud-
ies in which sighted children and children
with visual impairments participated (Hut-
tenlocher & Presson, 1973; Millar, 1976).
The clock test was divided into two subtests:
clock test 6 and clock test 7.5. For both
subtests, the participants who are blind and
the participants with low vision used touch,
although the participants with low vision
were allowed to use their residual vision as
well.
The researcher placed the two piec6s of
cardboard on a table in front of the partici-
pant, the one with the constant indicator
pointing to position 6 and the other one with
the revolving indicator. Afterward, the partic-
ipant was asked to imagine the direction of
the constant indicator for an observer who
would have been moved to position 12, posi-
tion 3, and position 9, and then to point to the
direction on the cardboard with the revolving
indicator. The same process was repeated
with the constant indicator pointing at posi-
tion 7.5 (subtest 2). Each participant's record
was calculated as an error of direction, based
on the divergence (in degrees) that the direc-
tion of the revolving indicator had from the
correct direction (see Figure 2). Every time
that the divergence was higher than 20 de-
grees, the participant's answer was consid-
ered wrong. The wrong answers were re-
corded, and each wrong answer scored one
point.
Journal of Visual hipairment & Blindness, September 2010 : 57.1

Figure 2. Divergence between the direction
of the revolving indicator and the correct di-
rection. Angle a illustrates the divergence
and is measured in degrees.
Figure 3 illustrates an example of the pro-
cedure. The participants looked at the card-
board Square (position a); they had to ima 'gine
the direction of the constant indicator for an
observer who would have been moved to po-
sition 3 (position b); and having the cardboard
with the revolving indicator in front of them
(position c), they had to indicate the right
answer (position d).
[In the second test (the room test) the par-
ticipant was asked to imagine that he or she
was in the center of a square room. The po-
sitions of 4 space points in relation to himself
or herself were orally described to the partic-
ipant (see Figure 4, position 1). The partici-
pant was then asked to imagine that he or she
was moving toward one of the four positions
and to redefine the position of the other three
points in relation to himself or herself (see
Figure 4, position 2). The researcher recorded
12
99
16 b LILTd
Figure 3. Example of the process followed in the clock. test.
572 Journalof Visual Impainnent & Blindness, September 2010
the wrong answers, and each wrong answer
scored one point. A similar test was used in
Penrod and Petrosko's (2003) study.
REsuiTS
Initially, the means and the standard devia-
tions of the participants' scores were calcu-
lated. The scores corresponded to the wrong
answers (see Table 1).
An analysis of variance (ANOVA; a GLM
with repeated measures) revealed that there
was a within-subjects effect of the direction
of the indicator in clock test 6 (F = 12.789,
p < 0.001), but not in clock test 7.5 (F =
2.359, p = 0.104).
In clock test 6, the participants' answers
were less accurate in the case of a 90-degree
clockwise rotation (position 9) (t = -4.500,
df = 27, p < .001) or a 270-degree clockwise
rotation (position 3) (t = -3.104, df = 27,
p < .005) than when the mental rotation had
to be made at an angle of 180 degrees
(position 12). In clock test 7.5, there were
no statistically significant differences be-
tween the participants' answers for the
three positions. Moreover, the participants'
answers were more accurate in clock test 6
than in clock test 7.5 (1 = -2.837, df = 27,
p < .01).
On the room test, the participants made an
average of 1.32 errors (SD = 1.39). Fourteen
of the 28 participants did not give any wrong
answer, 5 participants gave wrong answers on
two of the three points, and 9 participants
gave wrong answers on all three points (first
02010 AFB, All Rights Reserved
 door

door door

picture frame 4 window picture frame

POSITION 1 POSITION 2

bookcase bookcase

Figure 4. Room test: The initial imaginary condition (position i) and the final position
of the observer, resulting from the imaginary performed movement in the room (position 2).

group: aged 12 or younger, second group: residual vision (M = 1.36, SD = 1.216). For
aged 12 or older). the room test, the 2 x 2 x 2 ANOVA rev6aled
To examine the influence of residual vision, a main effect of vision status, F(l, 20) =
gender and age to mental rotation ability, we 4.722, p < .05, but no main effect of age and
calculated a 2 x 2 x 2 (gender x vision status x gender and no interactions. The participants
age) (ANOVA). This analysis applied for each who are blind performed less accurately (M =
test of mental rotation separately. Moreover, the 1.79, SD = 1.424) than did the participants
sample was divided into two age-groups. with residual vision (M = 0.86, SD = 1.231).
For clock test 6, the 2 x 2 x 2 ANOVA
revealed a main effect of vision status, F(1, DISCUSSION
20) = 4.489, p < .05, but no main effect of The results of our study indicate that a com-
age and gender and no interactions. The par- bination of two factors seemed to influence
ticipants who were blind performed less ac- the participants' performance: the relation of
curately (M = 1.86, SD = 1.099) than did the the initial and final position of the observation
participants with residual vision (M = 0.93, (the one after the mental rotation) and the
SD = 1.072). The results of the statistical angle that was shaped by the object of obser-
analysis of clock test 7.5 were similar; there vation (in our case, the indicator) and the
was a significant main effect of vision status, position of the observer. In both subtests-
F(l, 20) = 7.069, p < .05. The participants clock test 6 and clock test 7.5-the partici-
who are blind performed worse (M = 2.50,
pants' answers deviated less from the correct
SD = 0.650) than did the participants with
answers when the mental rotation should have
been made at an angle of 180 degrees; that is,
Table 1
Means and standard deviations for the the position of the observation was in the
participants' errors on the clock test. opposite direction of the initial one. In this
Clock test 6 Clock test 7.5 case the change of position was implemented
on the observer's vertical axis. These results
Position Mean SD Mean SD
verify the results of Millar (1976). However,
Position 12 .21 .418 .54 .508 contrary to our findings, Millar (1976) exam-
Position 3 .54 .508 .75 .441 ined only the vertical direction (that is, corre-
Position 9 .64 .488 .64 .488 sponding to position 6 of the indicator in our
Total 1.39 1.167 1.93 1.120
study), and the participants in her study were

02010 AFB, All Rights Reserved Journal of Visual Impainnent & Blinthiess, September 2010 573
 given cards to pick the correct answer and were
younger than the participants in our study.
Furthermore, the participants with residual
vision performed better than did the partici-
pants who are blind. This finding is in line
with reports from other authors that sup-
ported the effect of residual vision (Ungar,
Blades, & Spencer, 1995; WarTen, 1994) and
visual experience (Dulin & Hatwell, 2006;
Hatwell, 1985; Millar, 1976) in the ability to
engage in mental rotation. It should be noted
that in the room test, both the participants
who were blind and the participants with re-
sidual vision were tested in an imaginary sit-
uation, and, as a result, residual vision pro-
vided no help. This fact could lead us to
conclude that congenital visual impairment
influences mental rotation ability even in
tasks for which vision is not necessary. How-
ever, to strengthen such a conclusion, mental
rotation ability shoutd be examined in a clock
test in which all the participants are in the
same circumstances, namely, with the partic-
ipants with residual vision blindfolded.
The participants' performance on the tests
may have been influenced both by the accu-
racy of the mental representation that was
stored in short-term memory and by the abil-
ity to engage in a mental rotation of this
representation. Hence, the first question that
springs to mind is whether individuals who
are congenitally blind have difficulty with
spatial coding or with the mental rotation of
mental representation. In the first case, an
incorrect mental rotation results from ineffec-
tive spatial coding. Ungar et al.'s (1-995) find-
ings indeed verify this assumption. Moreover,
Postma, Zuidhoek, Noordzij, and Kappers
(2007) reported that the mental rotation of a
layout of objects requires recollection of the
accurate position of the object and cannot be
based on information relative to movement.
Hence, we can conclude that the more accu-
rate the mental representation of the layout,
the easier and more effective the mental ro-
tation will be. The second question that arises
574 Journalof Visual Impairment & Blindness, September 2010
from this study is this: What is the magnitude
of influence that spatial representation has on
the mental rotation process? Future research
should aim to answer these questions.
Limitations
A probable limitation of this study was the
size of the sample. A larger number of par-
ticipants would have allowed us to draw more
tangible conclusions and to examine the in-
fluence of other variables on their mental ro-
tation ability, such as the age at which the
participants lost their vision, the participants'
school achievement, and the participants'
ability to move independently.
REFERENCES
Arditi, A., Holtzman, D. J., & Kosslyn, M. S.
(1988). Mental imagery and sensory expe-
rience in congenital blindness. Neuropsy-
chologia, 26, 1-12.
Carpenter, A. P., & Eisenberg, P. (1978).
Mental rotation and the frame of reference
in blind and sighted individuals. Perception
& Psychophysics, 23, 117-124.
Dulin, D., & Hatwell, Y. (2006). The effects
of visual experience and training in raised-
line materials on the mental spatial imagery
of blind persons. Journal of Visual Impair-
ment & Blindness, 100, 414-424.
Hatwell, Y. (1985). Piagetian reasoning and
the blind. New York: American Foundation
for the Blind.
Heller, M. (1989). Picture and pattern percep-
tion in the sighted and the blind: The advan-
tage of late blind. Perception, 18, 379-389.
Heller, M., Brackett, D. D., Scroggs, E., &
Allen, A. C. (2001). Haptic perception of
the horizontal by blind and low-vision in-
dividuals. Perception,30, 601-610.
Heller, M., Brackett, D. D., Scroggs, E., Ste-
ffen, H., Heatherly, K., & Salik, S. (2002).
Tangible pictures: Viewpoint effects and
linear perspective in visually impaired peo-
ple. Perception, 3-1, 747-769.
HuIttenlocher, J., & Presson, C. C. (1973).
Mental rotation and the perspective prob-
lem. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 277-299.
©2010AFB. All Rights Reserved
Kessler, K., & Thomson, A. (2010). The
embodied nature of spatial perspective
taking: Embodied transformation versus
sensorimotor interference. Cognition,
114, 72-88.
Marmor, G. S., & Zaback, A. L. (1976).
Mental rotation by the blind: Does mental
rotation depend on visual imagery. Journal
of Experimental Psychology: Human Per-
ception and Petformance, 2, 515-521.
Millar, S. (1976). Spatial representation by
blind and sighted children. Journalof Exper-
imental Child Ps,ychology, 21, 460-479.
Noordzij, M. L., Zuidhoek, S., & Postma, A.
(2007). The influence of visual experience
on visual and spatial imagery. Perception,
36, 101-112.
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations:A
dual coding approach. Oxford, England:
Oxford University Press.
Penrod, W. M., & Petrosko, J. (2003). Spatial
organization skills of the blind in large out-
door places. RE:view, 34. 155-164.
,Pews
&Featres
From the Field
People
APIPOIN'MINTMN
Erika Arbogast was recently named president
of Blind and Vision Rehabilitation Services
(BVRS) of Pittsburgh. In her new position, she
will oversee all of BVRS' programs and ser-
vices, supervise 110 employees, and manage a
$5. I million operating budget. Before accepting
the position at BVRS, Ms. Arbogast was vice
president of programs for Life'sWork of Penn-
sylvania. Ms. Arbogast holds a master's degree
@2010 AFB. All Rights Reserved
Postma, A., Zuidhoek, S., Noordzij, M. L.,
& Kappers, A. M. L. (2007). Differences
between early-blind, late-blind, and blind-
folded-sighted people in haptic spatial-
configuration learning and resulting mem-
ory traces. Perception, 36, 1253-1265.
Ungar, S., Blades, M., & Spencer, C. (1995).
Mental rotation of a tactile layout by young
visually impaired children. Perception, 24,
891-900.
Warren, D. H. (1994). Blindness and chil-
dren: An individual differences approach.
Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press.
Eleni Koustriava, M.A., Ph.D. student, Depart-
ment of Educationaland Social Policy, University
of Macedonia. 156 Egnalia Street, 54006, Thessa-
loniki, Greece, e-mail: <elkous@ggmail.coni>.
Konstantinos Papadopoulos, Ph.D., assistant
professor. Department of Educational and Social
Policy. University of Macedonia, Thessaloniki,
Greece,"e-mail: <kpaapado@tuom.gr>.
in professional leadership from Carlow Univer-
I sity, Pittsburgh. For more information, contact:
BVRS, 1800 West Street, Homestead, PA
15120; phone: 412-368-4400; web site: <www.
pghvis.org>.
AWARDS
The Association for Education and Rehabilitation
of the Blind and Visually Impaired (AER) distrib-
uted its highest awards at its recent international
conference. Stephen Barrett, the deceased
former chief exectItive officer of Blind and Vision
Rehabilitation Services in Pittsburgh, received
special recognition for his leadership in the reha-
bilitation of adults with visual impainnents. Mi-
chael Bina, president and chief executive officer,
.ioural of Visual hIpairment & Blindness, September 2010 575
 COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

Author: Koustriava, Eleni; Papadopoulos, Konstantinos

Title: Mental Rotation Ability of Individuals with Visual Impairments

Source: J Vis Impair Blindness 104 no9 S 2010 p. 570-5

ISSN: 0145-482X
Publisher: American Foundation for the Blind
11 Penn Plaza, Suite 300, NY, NY 10001-2018

The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and it is reproduced
with permission. Further reproduction of this article in violation of the copyright is
prohibited. To contact the publisher: http://www.afb.org/

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-
licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make
any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently
verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever
caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.