"Love looks not with the eyes": supranormal processing of emotional speech in individuals with late-blindness versus preserved processing in individuals with congenital-blindness.

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognition & Emotion Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-24 DOI:10.1080/02699931.2024.2357656
Boaz M Ben-David, Daniel-Robert Chebat, Michal Icht
{"title":"\"Love looks not with the eyes\": supranormal processing of emotional speech in individuals with late-blindness versus preserved processing in individuals with congenital-blindness.","authors":"Boaz M Ben-David, Daniel-Robert Chebat, Michal Icht","doi":"10.1080/02699931.2024.2357656","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Processing of emotional speech in the absence of visual information relies on two auditory channels: semantics and prosody. No study to date has investigated how blindness impacts this process. Two theories, Perceptual Deficit, and Sensory Compensation, yiled different expectations about the role of visual experience (or its lack thereof) in processing emotional speech. To test the effect of vision and early visual experience on processing of emotional speech, we compared individuals with congenital blindness (CB, <i>n</i> = 17), individuals with late blindness (LB, <i>n</i> = 15), and sighted controls (SC, <i>n</i> = 21) on identification and selective-attention of semantic and prosodic spoken-emotions. Results showed that individuals with blindness performed at least as well as SC, supporting Sensory Compensation and the role of cortical reorganisation. Individuals with LB outperformed individuals with CB, in accordance with Perceptual Deficit, supporting the role of early visual experience. The LB advantage was moderated by executive functions (working-memory). Namely, the advantage was erased for individuals with CB who showed higher levels of executive functions. Results suggest that vision is not necessary for processing of emotional speech, but early visual experience could improve it. The findings support a combination of the two aforementioned theories and reject a dichotomous view of deficiencies/enhancements of blindness.</p>","PeriodicalId":48412,"journal":{"name":"Cognition & Emotion","volume":" ","pages":"1354-1367"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition & Emotion","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2024.2357656","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Processing of emotional speech in the absence of visual information relies on two auditory channels: semantics and prosody. No study to date has investigated how blindness impacts this process. Two theories, Perceptual Deficit, and Sensory Compensation, yiled different expectations about the role of visual experience (or its lack thereof) in processing emotional speech. To test the effect of vision and early visual experience on processing of emotional speech, we compared individuals with congenital blindness (CB, n = 17), individuals with late blindness (LB, n = 15), and sighted controls (SC, n = 21) on identification and selective-attention of semantic and prosodic spoken-emotions. Results showed that individuals with blindness performed at least as well as SC, supporting Sensory Compensation and the role of cortical reorganisation. Individuals with LB outperformed individuals with CB, in accordance with Perceptual Deficit, supporting the role of early visual experience. The LB advantage was moderated by executive functions (working-memory). Namely, the advantage was erased for individuals with CB who showed higher levels of executive functions. Results suggest that vision is not necessary for processing of emotional speech, but early visual experience could improve it. The findings support a combination of the two aforementioned theories and reject a dichotomous view of deficiencies/enhancements of blindness.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
"爱不是用眼睛看的":晚期盲人对情感语言的超常处理与先天性盲人对情感语言的保留处理。
在没有视觉信息的情况下,情感语言的处理依赖于两个听觉通道:语义和韵律。迄今为止,还没有研究调查过失明如何影响这一过程。知觉缺陷和感觉补偿这两种理论对视觉经验(或缺乏视觉经验)在情绪语言处理中的作用有着不同的预期。为了检验视觉和早期视觉经验对情绪语言处理的影响,我们比较了先天性失明患者(CB,n = 17)、晚期失明患者(LB,n = 15)和视力正常对照组(SC,n = 21)对语义和拟声口语情绪的识别和选择性注意。结果显示,失明患者的表现至少与健视对照组相同,这支持了感觉补偿和大脑皮层重组的作用。根据知觉缺陷(Perceptual Deficit),盲人的表现优于盲人,这支持了早期视觉经验的作用。枸杞多糖的优势受到执行功能(工作记忆)的调节。也就是说,执行功能水平较高的 CB 患者的优势会被削弱。研究结果表明,视觉并不是情绪化言语处理的必要条件,但早期视觉经验可以改善情绪化言语处理。研究结果支持上述两种理论的结合,并否定了将盲人的缺陷/增强一分为二的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cognition & Emotion
Cognition & Emotion PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
90
期刊介绍: Cognition & Emotion is devoted to the study of emotion, especially to those aspects of emotion related to cognitive processes. The journal aims to bring together work on emotion undertaken by researchers in cognitive, social, clinical, and developmental psychology, neuropsychology, and cognitive science. Examples of topics appropriate for the journal include the role of cognitive processes in emotion elicitation, regulation, and expression; the impact of emotion on attention, memory, learning, motivation, judgements, and decisions.
期刊最新文献
Emotion malleability beliefs prompt cognitive reappraisal: evidence from an online longitudinal intervention for adolescents. Dissociating the roles of episodic retrieval and contingency awareness in valence contingency learning. For better or for worse: differential effects of the emotional valence of words on children's recall. Metacognitive confidence and affect - two sides of the same coin? From "isolation" to "me-time": linguistic shifts enhance solitary experiences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1