Multiple Object Tracking in People with Williams Syndrome and in Normally Developing Children

Multiple object tracking is hypothesized to utilize visual indexes, which may provide rapid, parallel access to a limited number of visual objects, thereby supporting a variety of spatial tasks. We examined whether faulty indexing might play a role in the severe visuospatial deficits found in Willia...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Psychological science 2005-11, Vol.16 (11), p.905-912
Main Authors: O'Hearn, Kirsten, Landau, Barbara, Hoffman, James E.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adolescent
Age groups
Child
Child development
Child psychology
Child, Preschool
Children
Cognition
Cognitive psychology
Control groups
Developmental psychology
Female
Humans
Indexation
Legal objections
Male
Mental health
Perceptual Disorders - etiology
Philosophical object
Space
Space Perception - physiology
Spatial analysis
Trajectory control
Visual perception
Visual Perception - physiology
Williams syndrome
Williams Syndrome - complications
Williams Syndrome - physiopathology
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Multiple object tracking is hypothesized to utilize visual indexes, which may provide rapid, parallel access to a limited number of visual objects, thereby supporting a variety of spatial tasks. We examined whether faulty indexing might play a role in the severe visuospatial deficits found in Williams syndrome. We asked observers to track from one to four targets in a display of eight identical objects. Objects remained stationary (static condition) or moved randomly and independently (moving condition) for 6 s, after which observers pointed to the objects they thought were targets. People with Williams syndrome were impaired in the moving condition, but not the static condition, compared with mental-age-matched control participants. Normal children who were younger than the mental-age-matched control children did not show the same profile as individuals with Williams syndrome, which suggests that the difference between the tasks in Williams syndrome did not reflect simple developmental immaturity. Error analysis revealed that all groups had "slippery" indexes, falsely identifying target neighbors, and further suggested that people with Williams syndrome deploy fewer indexes than do people without this disorder.
ISSN:0956-7976
1467-9280
DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01635.x