Abstract
We investigated how the visibility of targets influenced the type of point used to provide directions. In Study 1, we asked 605 passersby in three localities for directions to well-known local landmarks. When that landmark was in plain view behind the requester, most respondents pointed with their index fingers, and few respondents pointed more than once. In contrast, when the landmark was not in view, respondents pointed initially with their index fingers, but often elaborated with a whole-hand point. In Study 2, we covertly filmed the responses from 157 passersby we approached for directions, capturing both verbal and gestural responses. As in Study 1, few respondents produced more than one gesture when the target was in plain view and initial points were most likely to be index finger points. Thus, in a Western geographical context in which pointing with the index finger is the dominant form of pointing, a slight change in circumstances elicited a preference for pointing with the whole hand when it was the second or third manual gesture in a sequence.
Highlights
We investigated how the visibility of targets influenced the type of point used to provide directions
In a Western geographical context in which pointing with the index finger is the dominant form of pointing, a slight change in circumstances elicited a preference for pointing with the whole hand when it was the second or third manual gesture in a sequence
Iverson and Goldin-Meadow (2001) interpreted these patterns to suggest that there were two contrasting cognitive tactics at play: where a target could be encompassed by a line of regard, pointing with the index finger served to augment the visual perception of the referent, but where the referent could not be seen—e.g. when participants were either congenitally blind or sighted, but blindfolded— participants used a communicative tactic focussed on path segments, as a series of waypoints to the referent
Summary
We investigated how the visibility of targets influenced the type of point used to provide directions. Iverson and Goldin-Meadow (2001) interpreted these patterns to suggest that there were two contrasting cognitive tactics at play: where a target could be encompassed by a line of regard, pointing with the index finger served to augment the visual perception of the referent, but where the referent could not be seen—e.g. when participants were either congenitally blind or sighted, but blindfolded— participants used a communicative tactic focussed on path segments, as a series of waypoints to the referent These findings led us to hypothesize that blocking visual access to a referent might alter the shape of the pointing hand in more naturalistic, less controlled circumstances (i.e. to explore the ecological validity of the previous, laboratory-based findings). If we fail to find this influence of target visibility in a more naturalistic context, this might implicate other aspects of their experimental or laboratory environment than line of sight
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
