MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989489380 · doi:10.1080/01650250244000191

Development of drawing abilities in a distinct population: Depiction of perceptual principles by three children with congenital total blindness

2003· article· en· W1989489380 on OpenAlex
Amedeo D’Angiulli, Stefania Maggi

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Behavioral Development · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPerceptionCognitive psychologyBlindnessDepictionPopulationVisual perceptionGenerativityChild developmentSpatial abilityPerceptual learningDevelopmental psychologyCommunicationCognitionVisual artsOptometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We studied the development of spontaneous tactile drawing in three 12-year-old children with congenital total blindness and with no previous drawing tuition. In a period of 9 months, from an initial phase in which they were taught to draw tangible straight and curve raised lines, the three blind children went on making spontaneous raised outlines representing edges, surfaces of objects, vantage point, and motion. The corpus of drawings produced by these children shows that several aspects of outline pictures can be implemented through touch. The perceptual principles represented in these drawings are comparable to those commonly found in sighted children. On the one hand, this convergence indicates similarities in the way vision and touch mediate the acquisition and the conceptualisation of spatial information from objects and the environment. On the other hand, it reflects the influence of cross-modal plasticity typically associated with early or congenital blindness. This study suggests that drawing development in general does not depend on learning pictorial conventions. Rather it seems driven by natural generativity based on children’s knowledge of space and perceptual principles.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.519

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it