| R L Gregory
and J G Wallace
Reproduced from Experimental Psychology Society
Monograph No. 2 1963
7. Relevance to the Theory of Perception
The fact that we have attempted to make some sort of a study
of a case of recovery from early blindness does not give us the
right to attempt an authoritative statement as to the importance
of such cases for the theory of perception. In thinking about
this single case, however, the whole problem has been much in
our minds and has inevitably led us to develop some opinions.
In 1949, D. O. Hebb made a great deal of the cases assembled
by von Senden in his well-known book on The Organisation of
Behaviour. Indeed he regarded them as providing powerful evidence
for the slow development of perception in infancy. "We are
not used", he writes, "to thinking of a single perception
as slowly and painfully learned, . . . but it has already been
seen, in the discussion of the congenitally blind after operation,
that it actually is". (Hebb, opus. cit., pp. 77 -
8). In the light of our experience with S.B., this inference strikes
us as distinctly questionable. Is it really certain that what
applies to perception after recovery of vision in the adult applies
in essentially the same way to its normal growth in infancy?
First, what are the reasons for the slow recovery of vision in
the adult patient? Hebb evidently believes that the situation
of such a patient is essentially that of the child, with its normal
perceptual development arrested until the eyes are opened. Although
he is evidently aware of the "emotional crisis" through
which such patients commonly pass, he plainly does not regard
reduced motivation as the principal cause of slowness in learning.
Indeed he draws special attention to the fact that motivation
is not disturbed in the first phase after operation, immediately
upon beginning to use the eyes. He suggests, further, that the
"crisis of motivation" is due directly to the difficulty
in achieving pattern vision, and is thus a direct response to
the disheartening slowness with which perceptual skill is acquired.
But is it? In the case of S.B., the patient made extremely rapid
progress after operation and very soon found that his vision was
useful, as in telling the time. It did in fact change his whole
way of life within a few weeks of the first operation and some
progress continued for the next two years, until his death. It
is true that he did not learn to read, and for this and many other
reasons found himself handicapped in the world of sighted people.
It is this sense of overall inadequacy, we suggest, rather than
deficiency of pattern vision per Se, which produced a crisis
which lasted until the end.
Further, if emotional crisis is primarily a response to slowness
in perceptual learning, why does it not occur in the normal child?
It could of course be argued that the process is more difficult
for the adult, but throughout Hebb argues that the position in
the child is basically similar to that of the adult whose vision
is restored at operation. Is this a tenable assumption? The adult,
after all, has developed a "touch world" which has served
him well for many years, and which has become accepted as the
principal vehicle of his occupational and social adaptation. The
child, on the other hand, is concerned to develop a "visual
world" ab initio, and although tactile and motor activities
contribute in an important way to its evolution, it is difficult
to think of the two cases as in any real sense similar.
We find similar difficulties where Hebb tries to show that the
perception of form is largely built upon patterns of eye movements.
(Hebb, opus cit., pp. 84 - 91). Hebb takes as evidence
here the reported fact that operated patients count the corners
of polygons in order to name them, moving their eyes from corner
to corner as a man might move his fingers in active touch. Yet
can one really infer that the patient is reproducing the normal
visual behaviour of the young child? First, there is no clear
evidence that, in the acquisition of form perception, children
really do scan the contours of objects or figures in the manner
suggested by Hebb. And secondly, it would indeed be surprising
if people who had lived for years without vision did not, at least
at first, tend to "touch" the salient features with
their eyes though one must bear in mind that ocular scanning is
often severely disturbed by nystagmus. Although further study
of the role of eye movements in the growth of form discrimination
is evidently needed, it would appear prima fade unlikely
that cases of the kind described in this study can tell us anything
very significant about the normal development of perception in
infancy. [
Footnote 12.]
It is of course true that in nearly (though not quite) all these
cases of recovery of vision after long-standing blindness the
development of perceptual skill is very slow, even when considerable
sight was present before operation. But this, we suggest, is due
not to the fact that visual learning, whether in the child or
the adult, is inevitably slow but to lack of practice in
making appropriate use of the available input. It would seem that
the difficulty, is not so much in learning per se as in
changing perceptual habits and strategies from touching to
seeing. A not dissimilar phenomenon occurs in many cases with
gradual loss of a sense or a limb; the patient will, at a certain
stage, do better to abandon using the sense or limb altogether;
to change his way of life to avoid and ignore it even if it is
partly functional. In the event of some recovery of function,
great difficulty may be experienced by the patient (and by those
concerned with his rehabilitation) in inducing him to revert to
the use of the impaired sense or limb. Indeed this may be one
of the principal obstacles in the re-education of patients with
any type of higher neurological disability. [
Footnote 13.]
Another point of some interest in the present case is the relatively
good intelligence and education of our patient, in which he resembles
the patient reported by Latta (1904). Our patient, like Latta’s,
was much concerned while blind in trying to visualise the
world and to know it as other men know it. One might even say
that their attempt to see was made long before their eyes were
opened to the light, and in this respect they differ not only
from most other cases in the literature but also of course from
infants.
The finding that S.B.’s visual space was not disturbed by the
geometrical - optical illusions, and that apparent depth was not
evoked by perspective drawings, show that his spatial organisation
was far from normal. Since investigating the case, we have devoted
considerable thought to the origin of these illusions and have
arrived at the tentative view that they depend upon inappropriate
scaling by the mechanism which produces size-constancy. If this
should prove correct, it may be surmised that the figures failed
to evoke constancy size-scaling in our patient, either through
lack of early learning or maturational defect. It would seem of
some importance, therefore, to devote attention to the study of
these illusions in children with special reference to the development
of size constancy.
Perhaps the most important outcome of our study is the evidence
it provides for transfer from early touch experience to vision
many years later. The fact that our patient was able, certainly
with a minimum of training - and perhaps with none at all - to
recognise by vision upper case letters which he had learned by
touch, and that he was unable to recognise by vision lower
case letters which he had not learned by touch, provides
strong evidence for cross-modal transfer. It will be borne in
mind, too, that it took him many months to learn to recognise
by vision letters which he had not previously learned by
touch. One may point out that the "control" provided
by the lower-case letters is vital to the argument, since we can
never wholly rule out the possibility of some residual vision
(undoubtedly present in this case). The fact that S.B. could recognise
the figures in the Ishihara Plates (by far the most surprising
observation we made) gives evidence of transfer and, incidentally,
renders it most unlikely that the modus operandi of transfer
lies in identity of motor patterns (i.e. patterns of eye-movement
corresponding with patterns of active touch). As has been said,
gross observation of eye-movements, which consisted in large and
apparently uncontrolled jerks resembling exaggerated saccades,
made it impossible to believe that the patient could follow outlines
of relatively small figures, such as the Ishihara digits, by controlled
movements of the eyes.
We may conclude that this case does provide evidence of transfer
of perceptual information from the tactual sphere to the visual
modality. [
Footnote 14.] This seems somewhat at variance with
the evidence from studies of cross-modal transfer in animals [
Footnote 15. ]and we can only speculate as to the reasons for
the discrepancy. It may be that language is the decisive factor.
In our view, these cases tell us nothing about the classical
philosophical problems of the nature of perceived space (as von
Senden fondly hoped that they would) and they tell us little or
nothing about the importance of early visual learning for perception
in the adult. We cannot sustain the view of Hebb that these cases
provide windows through which we may see the perceptual system
of the infant - they are not living fossils in which the past
is re-enacted. We studied an adult with a unique past; what we
found was the effect of this past on a normal brain. We did not
find the brain or the perceptual system of an infant and we learned
little or nothing about the normal development of vision. At the
same time, we believe that our case has demonstrated the impact
of visual experience on a man to all intents and purposes long
blind, and the gains and losses which this revelation brought
in its wake. We have ascertained that vision, although it may
prove genuinely useful to the man long blind, is at the same time
a potential source of grievous hurt. We have further ascertained
that, in such a case, direct transfer of information from patterns
of touch to equivalent visual patterns is almost certainly possible.
continues
to Appendices |