Opin vísindi

Designing sensory-substitution devices: Principles, pitfalls and potential1

Designing sensory-substitution devices: Principles, pitfalls and potential1

Title: Designing sensory-substitution devices: Principles, pitfalls and potential1
Author: Kristjansson, Arni   orcid.org/0000-0003-4168-4886
Moldoveanu, Alin   orcid.org/0000-0002-1368-7249
Jóhannesson, Ómar I.   orcid.org/0000-0002-5594-4055
Bălan, Oana
Spagnol, Simone
Valgeirsdóttir, Vigdís Vala
Unnthorsson, Runar
Date: 2016-09-21
Language: English
Scope: 769-787
University/Institute: Háskóli Íslands
University of Iceland
School: Heilbrigðisvísindasvið (HÍ)
School of Health Sciences (UI)
Verkfræði- og náttúruvísindasvið (HÍ)
School of Engineering and Natural Sciences (UI)
Department: Sálfræðideild (HÍ)
Faculty of Psychology (UI)
Iðnaðarverkfræði-, vélaverkfræði- og tölvunarfræðideild (HÍ)
Faculty of Industrial Eng., Mechanical Eng. and Computer Science (UI)
Series: Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience;34(5)
ISSN: 0922-6028
1878-3627 (eISSN)
DOI: 10.3233/RNN-160647
Subject: Developmental Neuroscience; Neurology; Clinical Neurology; Sensory substitution; Neural plasticity; Multisensory perception; Taugasálfræði; Skynjun; Upplýsingakerfi; Rafeindaverkfræði
URI: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11815/712

Show full item record


Kristjansson, A., Moldoveanu, A., Johannesson, O. I., Balan, O., Spagnol, S., Valgeirsdottir, V. V., & Unnthorsson, R. (2016). Designing sensory-substitution devices: Principles, pitfalls and potential. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience, 34(5), 769-787. doi:10.3233/rnn-160647


An exciting possibility for compensating for loss of sensory function is to augment deficient senses by conveying missing information through an intact sense. Here we present an overview of techniques that have been developed for sensory substitution (SS) for the blind, through both touch and audition, with special emphasis on the importance of training for the use of such devices, while highlighting potential pitfalls in their design. One example of a pitfall is how conveying extra information about the environment risks sensory overload. Related to this, the limits of attentional capacity make it important to focus on key information and avoid redundancies. Also, differences in processing characteristics and bandwidth between sensory systems severely constrain the information that can be conveyed. Furthermore, perception is a continuous process and does not involve a snapshot of the environment. Design of sensory substitution devices therefore requires assessment of the nature of spatiotemporal continuity for the different senses. Basic psychophysical and neuroscientific research into representations of the environment and the most effective ways of conveying information should lead to better design of sensory substitution systems. Sensory substitution devices should emphasize usability, and should not interfere with other inter- or intramodal perceptual function. Devices should be task-focused since in many cases it may be impractical to convey too many aspects of the environment. Evidence for multisensory integration in the representation of the environment suggests that researchers should not limit themselves to a single modality in their design. Finally, we recommend active training on devices, especially since it allows for externalization, where proximal sensory stimulation is attributed to a distinct exterior object.


This article is published online with Open Access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (CC BY-NC 4.0)

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)