Visual perception and visuospatial cognition

Farran, Emily K.; Formby, Susan C.

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199594818.003.0060

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This contrast reflects the WS cognitive profile of impaired visuo-spatial ability compared to a relative strength in verbal ability (e.g., Udwin and Yule, 1991). Level of performance on spatial category representations in WS is similar to that reported on block construction tasks (Farran and Formby, 2012). This supports the notion that impaired spatial category representation could be a contributing factor to the hallmark impairment in visuo-spatial construction and drawing ability in WS (Mervis et al, 1999).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

“…As a group, a defining cognitive characteristic of WS is the discrepancy between poor spatial cognition compared to relatively strong verbal cognition. Whilst most spatial skills do not develop beyond the level of a typically developing (TD) 6-year-old, individuals with WS demonstrate an uneven profile of spatial performance (Farran and Formby, 2012). A profound deficit in performance on visuo-spatial construction tasks, such as the Wechsler Block Design task (e.g., Wechsler, 1992), is considered a hallmark of WS (Mervis et al, 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A profound deficit in performance on visuo-spatial construction tasks, such as the Wechsler Block Design task (e.g., Wechsler, 1992), is considered a hallmark of WS (Mervis et al, 1999). Performance on this task does not usually develop beyond the level of a TD 4-year-old (Farran and Formby, 2012). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Impaired Spatial Category Representations in Williams Syndrome; an Investigation of the Mechanistic Contributions of Non-verbal Cognition and Spatial Language Performance

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aims of this study were to: provide a precise characterisation of spatial category representations in Williams syndrome (WS); to determine the nature of the mechanistic contributions from spatial language performance and non-verbal cognition to spatial category representations in WS; and to explore the stability of spatial category representations in WS using error analysis. Spatial category representation was assessed across nine spatial categories (In, On, Under, In Front, Behind, Above, Below, Left, and Right) using an odd-one-out task. The performance of individuals with WS (N = 24; 12;00 years;months to 30;07 years;months) was compared to data from typically developing children aged four to 7 years (N = 75), published in Farran and Atkinson (2016). The WS group performed at the level of typical 4- and 5-year-olds. Despite this low level of ability, they demonstrated typical variation in their representation of easier to harder spatial categories, in line with the spatial category representation model (Farran and Atkinson, 2016). Error analysis of broad category understanding (i.e., category understanding which includes non-prototypical category members), however, showed that errors reflected fewer guess responses than expected by chance in the WS group only, which could suggest strategic responding in this group. Developmental trajectory analyses demonstrated a significant contributing influence of both non-verbal mental age and spatial language ability in the TD group. For the WS group, non-verbal mental age significantly contributed to spatial category representations, whilst the contributing influence of spatial language ability was marginally significant. With reference to level of ability, spatial category representations in the WS group were consistently lower than would be expected for non-verbal mental age, but on a par with their (low) spatial language mental age. Spatial category representations in WS are discussed with reference to their contribution to the hallmark deficit in spatial construction and drawing abilities in WS.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impaired Spatial Category Representations in Williams Syndrome; an Investigation of the Mechanistic Contributions of Non-verbal Cognition and Spatial Language Performance

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This has been demonstrated with respect to: delayed motor milestones (Carrasco et al, 2005); impairments on standardized motor tasks (Tsai et al, 2008; Atkinson, 2017; Wuang and Tsai, 2017); atypical reaching movements, walking and stair decent (Elliott et al, 2006; Hocking et al, 2010; Cowie et al, 2012). Furthermore, impaired spatial cognition is a hallmark deficit of WS (Farran and Formby, 2012). With reference to large-scale spatial knowledge, impairments are consistently demonstrated in WS (e.g., Farran et al, 2010, 2015; Purser et al, 2015), but the contribution of motor impairments to this deficit is currently unknown.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-Domain Associations Between Motor Ability, Independent Exploration, and Large-Scale Spatial Navigation; Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, Williams Syndrome, and Typical Development

Farran

Bowler

Karmiloff‐Smith

et al. 2019

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In typical infants, the achievement of independent locomotion has a positive impact on the development of both small-scale and large-scale spatial cognition. Here we investigated whether this association between the motor and spatial domain: (1) persists into childhood and (2) is detrimental to the development of spatial cognition in individuals with motor deficits, namely, individuals with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and individuals with Williams syndrome (WS). Despite evidence of a co-occurring motor impairment in many individuals with ADHD, little is known about the developmental consequences of this impairment. Individuals with WS demonstrate impaired motor and spatial competence, yet the relationship between these two impairments is unknown. Typically developing (TD) children ( N = 71), individuals with ADHD ( N = 51), and individuals with WS ( N = 20) completed a battery of motor tasks, a measure of independent exploration, and a virtual reality spatial navigation task. Retrospective motor milestone data were collected for the ADHD and WS groups. Results demonstrated a relationship between fine motor ability and spatial navigation in the TD group, which could reflect the developmental impact of the ability to manually manipulate objects, on spatial knowledge. In contrast, no relationships between the motor and spatial domains were observed for the ADHD or WS groups. Indeed, while there was evidence of motor impairment in both groups, only the WS group demonstrated an impairment in large-scale spatial navigation. The motor-spatial relationship in the TD, but not the ADHD and WS groups, suggests that aspects of spatial cognition can develop via a developmental pathway which bypasses input from the motor domain.

show abstract

“…For example, arriving at the final cap order requires spatial thinking as well as an ability to maintain attention throughout arranging each tray of caps. The TDMA group were matched to the WS group on a non-verbal task, the Raven's Coloured Progressive Matrices, and so it is likely that spatial and attentional abilities were broadly similar to those of the TDMA group (Breckenridge et al, 2012;Farran & Formby, 2012). Thus, whilst we can be confident that the comparatively larger group difference in the F-M 100 Hue test itself indicates reduced chromatic discrimination in the WS than would be expected for their chronological age, we suggest that the WS and TDMA group were performing at a lower level than the TDCA group on the F-M 100 Hue test due to poorer chromatic discrimination, but also on account of maturational differences in areas such as attention and spatial abilities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Colour discrimination and categorisation in Williams syndrome

Farran¹,

Cranwell²,

Alvarez³

et al. 2013

Research in Developmental Disabilities

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals with Williams syndrome (WS) present with impaired functioning of the dorsal visual stream relative to the ventral visual stream. As such, little attention has been given to ventral stream functions in WS. We investigated colour processing, a predominantly ventral stream function, for the first time in nineteen individuals with Williams syndrome. Colour discrimination was assessed using the Farnsworth-Munsell 100 hue test. Colour categorisation was assessed using a match-to-sample test and a colour naming task. A visual search task was also included as a measure of sensitivity to the size of perceptual colour difference. Results showed that individuals with WS have reduced colour discrimination relative to typically developing participants matched for chronological age; performance was commensurate with a typically developing group matched for non-verbal ability. In contrast, categorisation was typical in WS, although there was some evidence that sensitivity to the size of perceptual colour differences was reduced in this group.

show abstract

Visual perception and visuospatial cognition

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Impaired Spatial Category Representations in Williams Syndrome; an Investigation of the Mechanistic Contributions of Non-verbal Cognition and Spatial Language Performance

Impaired Spatial Category Representations in Williams Syndrome; an Investigation of the Mechanistic Contributions of Non-verbal Cognition and Spatial Language Performance

Cross-Domain Associations Between Motor Ability, Independent Exploration, and Large-Scale Spatial Navigation; Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, Williams Syndrome, and Typical Development

Colour discrimination and categorisation in Williams syndrome

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About