Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-5wvtr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T17:15:53.597Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - Blindness: A Source and Case of Neuronal Plasticity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 July 2009

Brigitte Röder
Affiliation:
Professor of Biological Psychology and Neuropsychology University of Hamburg, Germany
Paul B. Baltes
Affiliation:
Max-Planck-Institut für Bildungsforschung, Berlin
Patricia A. Reuter-Lorenz
Affiliation:
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Frank Rösler
Affiliation:
Philipps-Universität Marburg, Germany
Get access

Summary

ABSTRACT

The sensory deprivation model provides an opportunity to study the dependence of brain functions on experience in humans. This chapter reports studies on spatial and memory functions in blind humans to demonstrate that the lack of a particular environmental input results in specific behavioral and neural adaptations. It is concluded that neural networks established during development set the limits of adaptive capacities later in life.

INTRODUCTION

The capability of the brain to adapt to new requirements is called neuronal plasticity. Research has shown that the ability to change is a lifelong feature characteristic of the central nervous system (CNS) and is indeed the basis for learning and memory. Nevertheless, the extent of possible changes varies across the lifespan, and experience early in life may essentially determine the dynamic range for adaptations later in life. The existence of so-called critical periods in development (i.e., time windows during which adequate experience can cause normal development) is well accepted. The windows vary for different functions and seem to exist for basic sensory processes, as well as for more complex functions such as social behavior (e.g., Chapter 3). Although the time windows of increased plasticity vary for different functions, the principles of how experience shapes brain systems are most likely similar across functional domains (Bavelier & Neville, 2002). Therefore, research on the developmental principles of perceptual-cognitive functions will contribute to the understanding of biocultural co-constructivism in lifespan development.

Type
Chapter
Information
Lifespan Development and the Brain
The Perspective of Biocultural Co-Constructivism
, pp. 134 - 158
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amedi, A., Raz, N., Pianka, P., Malach, R., & Zohary, E. (2003). Early “visual” cortex activation correlates with superior verbal memory performance in the blind. Nature Neuroscience, 6 (7), 758–766CrossRef
Bavelier, D., & Neville, H. J. (2002). Cross-modal plasticity: Where and how. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 3, 443–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berardi, N., Pizzorusso, T., & Maffei, L. (2000). Critical periods during sensory development. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 10, 138–145CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Black, J. E., Jones, T. A., Nelson, C. A., & Greenough, W. T. (1998). Neuroplasticity and the developing brain. In N. Alessi, J. T. Coyle, S. I. Harrison, & S. Eth (Eds.), The handbook of child and adolescent psychiatry (Vol. 6, pp. 31–53). New York: WileyGoogle Scholar
Bourgeois, J.-P., Goldman-Rakic, P. S., & Rakic, P. (2000). Formation, elimination, and stabilization of synapses in the primate cerebral cortex. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The new cognitive neurosciences (2nd ed., pp. 45–53). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Cobb, N., Lawrence, D. M., & Nelson, N. D. (1979). Report on blind subjects' tactile and auditory recognition for environmental stimuli. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 48, 363–366CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, Y. E., & Andersen, R. A. (2002). A common reference frame for movement plans in the posterior parietal cortex. Neuroscience, 3, 553–562Google ScholarPubMed
Curran, T., & Schacter, D. L. (2000). Amnesia II: Cognitive neuropsychological issues. In M. J. Farah & T. E. Feinberg (Eds.), Patient-based approaches to cognitive neuroscience (pp. 291–299). Cambridge, MA:MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Cycowicz, Y. M. (2000). Memory development and event-related brain potentials in children. Biological Psychology, 54, 145–174CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beni, R., & Cornoldi, C. (1988). Imagery limitations in totally congenitally blind subjects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14 (4), 650–655Google ScholarPubMed
Eimer, M. (2004a). Electrophysiological studies of multisensory attention. In G. A. Calvert, C. Spence, & B. E. Stein (Eds.), The handbook of multisensory processes (pp. 549–562). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Eimer, M. (2004b). Multisensory integration: How visual experience shapes spatial perception. Current Biology, 14 (3), R115–R117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, D. (2000). Event-related brain potential investigations of memory and aging. Biological Psychology, 54, 174–206CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilbert, C. D., Sigman, M., & Crist, R. E. (2001). The neural basis of perceptual learning. Neuron, 31, 681–697CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gondan, M., Niederhausen, B., Rösler, F., & Röder, B. (2005). Multisensory processing in the redundant target effect: A behavioral and event-related potential study. Perception and Psychophysics, 67 (4), 713–726CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graziano, M. S., Cooke, D. F., & Taylor, C. S. (2000). Coding the location of the arm by sight. Science, 290 (5497), 1782–1786CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Groh, J. M., & Sparks, D. L. (1996). Saccades to somatosensory targets: I. Behavioral characteristics. Journal of Neurophysiology, 75 (1), 412–427CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hötting, K., Rösler, F., & Röder, B. (2003). Crossmodal and intermodal attention modulates event-related brain potentials to tactile and auditory stimuli. Experimental Brain Research, 148, 26–37Google Scholar
Hull, T., & Mason, H. (1995). Performance of blind children on digit-span tests. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 89, 166–169Google Scholar
Huttenlocher, P. R., & Dabholkar, A. S. (1997). Regional differences in synaptogenesis in human cortex. Journal of Comparative Neurology, 387, 167–1783.0.CO;2-Z>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, W. (1890). Principles of psychology. New York: HoltGoogle Scholar
Knudsen, E. I. (1998). Capacity for plasticity in the adult owl auditory system expanded by juvenile experience. Science, 279, 1531–1533CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knudsen, E. I. (2002). Instructed learning in the auditory localization pathway of the barn owl. Nature, 417, 322–328CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kujala, T., Alho, K., & Näätänen, R. (2000). Cross-modal reorganization of human cortical functions. Trends in Neuroscience, 23 (3), 115–120CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewkowicz, D. J. (2002). Heterogeneity and heterochrony in the development of intersensory perception. Cognitive Brain Research, 14, 41–63CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewkowicz, D. J., & Lickliter, R. (Eds.). (1994). The development of intersensory perception.Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Marchant, B., & Malloy, T. E. (1984). Auditory, tactile and visual imagery in PA learning by congenitally blind, deaf, and normal adults. Journal of Mental Imagery, 8, 19–32Google Scholar
Maurer, D. (1997). Neonatal synaesthesia: Implications for the processing of speech and faces. In S. Baron-Cohen & J. E. Harrison (Eds.), Synaesthesia: Classical and contemporary readings (pp. 224–242). Oxford, UK:BlackwellGoogle Scholar
Maurer, D., & Lewis, T. L. (2001). Visual acuity and spatial contrast sensitivity: Normal development and underlying mechanisms. In C. A. Nelson & M. Luciana (Eds.), Handbook of developmental cognitive neuroscience (pp. 237–251). Cambridge, MA:MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Millar, S. (1994). Understanding and representing space: Theory and evidence from studies with blind and sighted children. Oxford, UK:Clarendon PressGoogle Scholar
Neville, H. J. (1995). Developmental specificity in neurocognitive development in humans. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The cognitive neurosciences (pp. 219–231). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children.New York: International University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pring, L., Freistone, S. E., & Katan, S. A. (1990). Recalling pictures and words: Reversing the generation effect. Current Psychology: Research & Reviews, 9 (1), 35–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rauschecker, J. P. (1995). Compensatory plasticity and sensory substitution in the cerebral cortex. Trends in Neuroscience, 18 (1), 36–43CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Röder, B., & Neville, H. (2003). Developmental functional plasticity. In J. Grafman & I. Robertson (Eds.), Handbook of neuropsychology (Vol. 9, pp. 231–270). Amsterdam: ElsevierGoogle Scholar
Röder, B., & Rösler, F. (1998). Visual input does not facilitate the scanning of spatial images. Journal of Mental Imagery, 22 (3/4), 165–182Google Scholar
Röder, B., & Rösler, F. (2003). Memory for environmental sounds in sighted, congenitally blind and late blind adults: Evidence for cross-modal compensation. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 50, 27–39CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Röder, B., & Rösler, F. (2004). Compensatory plasticity as a consequence of sensory loss. In G. A. Calvert, C. Spence, & B. E. Stein (Eds.), The handbook of multisensory processes (pp. 719–748). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Röder, B., Rösler, F., & Hennighausen, E. (1997). Different cortical activation patterns in blind and sighted humans during encoding and transformation of haptic images. Psychophysiology, 34, 292–307CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Röder, B., Rösler, F., & Neville, H. J. (2001). Auditory memory in congenitally blind adults: A behavioral-electrophysiological investigation. Cognitive Brain Research, 11 (2), 289–303CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Röder, B., Rösler, F., & Spence, C. (2004). Early vision impairs tactual perception in the blind. Current Biology, 14 (2), 121–124CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Röder, B., Teder-Sälejärvi, W., Sterr, A., Rösler, F., Hillyard, S. A., & Neville, H. J. (1999). Improved auditory spatial tuning in blind humans. Nature, 400, 162–166CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rönnberg, J., & Nilsson, L. (1987). The modality effect, sensory handicap, and compensatory functions. Acta Psychologica, 65, 263–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rugg, M. D. (1995). ERP studies of memory. In M. D. Rugg & M. G. H. Coles (Eds.), Electrophysiology of mind (pp. 132–170). Oxford, UK: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
Schicke, T., Demuth, L., & Röder, B. (2002). Influence of visual information on the auditory median plane of the head. Neuroreport, 13 (13), 1627–1629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turkewitz, G., & Kenny, P. A. (1982). Limitations on input as a basis for neural organization and perceptual development: A preliminary theoretical statement. Developmental Psychobiology, 15, 357–368CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Praag, H., Schinder, A. F., Christie, B. R., Toni, N., Palmer, T. D., & Gage, F. H. (2002). Functional neurogenesis in the adult hippocampus. Nature, 415 (6875), 1030–1034CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wallace, M. T., & Stein, B. E. (2001). Sensory and multisensory responses in the newborn monkey superior colliculus. Journal of Neuroscience, 21 (22), 8886–8894CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Webb, S. J., Monk, C. S., & Nelson, C. A. (2001). Mechanisms of postnatal neurobiological development: Implications for human development. Developmental Neuropsychology, 19 (2), 147–171CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weeks, R., Horwitz, B., Aziz-Sultan, A., Tian, B., Wessinger, C. M., Cohen, L. G., Hallett, M., & Rauschecker, J. P. (2000). A positron emission tomographic study of auditory localization in the congenitally blind. Journal of Neuroscience, 20 (7), 2664–2672CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wyver, S. R., & Markham, R. (1998). Do children with visual impairments demonstrate superior short-term memory, memory strategies, and metamemory? Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 92 (11), 799–811Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×