ProTactile Connections to the World by Oscar Chacon

The following e-mail is from a listserv that I am humbled to be part of, shared in its entirety with permission from the author. In this post, my musings follow after Oscar's thoughts. 

-Heather Withrow, September 19, 2020

From: Oscar Chacon
Date: March 16, 2019
Subject: PT Connections to the World

PT squeeze ‘hi’ to you, family and friends,

ProTactile Connections to the World (OH MY!)

I had been going to Chicago Loop public library by L Train for a while. As I traveled and navigated through the city, I came to realize there are three PT major connections to the world. We are actually living in the tactile world. There are auditory and visual worlds out there meshed to this world. I have access to the visual world in low resolution stimulations. But in the tactile world I will write about is where my stimulations are high resolution. So these connections that I will describe had given me fascinating thoughts and insights to live in this amazing historic moment as a DeafBlind individual.

Before I go on, I want to define one term beforehand: background information (info for short.) I’ll be describing tactile world as if I assume you the reader is following me in tactile world. So that means some of us will have additional info in addition to tactile info as they move through the world. These types of info are what I call background info in this essay. Sometimes I describe these info, other times I don’t.

PT Connection #1: Direct tactile interactions.

I wake up to the tactile world in the morning, feeling my blankets and sheets surrounding me. I feel for how to remove these and do so. I feel my body moving off the bed. I walk with my feetwear or without, feeling texture and other tactile info on the sole of my feet. I feel different things put in the space I wake up in. I may or may not change any spaces I will travel through. I can feel with tactile sense if I am designing a room. For example, if I had a room for PT users to converge for various discussions, I may design with small tables with three chairs in front of them against the wall spaced few feet from each other, around the room. Then if there is enough space to feel too spacious to me, I will add central table-three chairs cluster(s). Then add rugs of varying designs that fix my position with ease. I feel details as I wash dishes. Many more examples of direct tactile experiences with loaded information in themselves (background info is always given for various individuals.)

First connection is direct tactile info when you touch anything.

PT Connection #2: Tactile Interfaces with Tools

I like feeling various bumps, motions, wheeling along, and many other sensations as I walk with my white cane (a tool). I may have some visual background info as I walk in the public. Still, these sensations are full of info if I want to derive patterns needed. Braille displays encodes English language in tactile dots. Plus they come with their own buttons that I feel and learn their functions. The train is a tool even if I may have the background info of watching scenery pass by. I still am fascinated by various bumps, motions, rolling of body, etc because I realize I can get a chosen pattern I need. It doesn’t matter what it is: we can get secondary tactile information from things. One thng I am dreaming is in relating to elevators. I know it have Braille numbers/letter to push the button labeled so. I will love it if the elevator also have vibrator and maybe refreshable Braille display indicating floor numbers.

Having tools giving me tactile information is the second connection.

PT Connection #3: ProTactile Languages

DeafBlind people including me had came together and had these first two connections to the tactile world. We also have the feeling of reciprocity between us. These inspired us to express ourselves in interactions by touching and stimulations related to touch which lead to PT languages flourishing in various places.

ProTactile was an idea presented and practiced by DeafBlind people starting in Seattle in 2007 then spreading ever since. It started with the idea that we need to be extra supportive of touch in the prevailing culture in order to inspire awareness in DB individuals to touch their world more. Now we are living in the tactile world with much more opportunities for DeafBlind people.

I was struck by these three connections to the tactile world. A world awaiting more explorations! And high resolution!

Any more PT connections you can think of or your own high resolution tactile exploration experience? Please add your thoughts!

--
[End of e-mail]

My Thoughts on Oscar's Experiences

Oh yes! Oscar's e-mail and his use of "high resolution tactile exploration" was a massive buzz-word for me for the reasons shared in my September 15, 2020 post on Tactile Resolution and Attention. Oscar's perspective on resolution was quality of information that came in through his senses, whether directly, or through secondary, indirect ways. I never thought of resolution that way until Oscar's version was associated with it being rich in information. This is different from my original, personal definition of "resolution" by the number of nerves through our tactile sense.

Oscar's thoughts on direct contact reminded me of 1st generation images (here we go, more graphic design talk!); and his thoughts on secondary tactile information is comparable to 2nd generation images. Basically 1st generation images are original media (a.k.a. direct contact) while a 2nd generation image is a photocopy of the original. Taking a picture of a picture of a picture; or a copy of an original documents' copy... with each level further away from the original, the information quality degrades but you are still somehow getting information. Just like Jude Nicholas (2010) shared, areas of skin with less nerve density still contributes information to the brain. I also see a connection with the first principle of ProTactile (granda & Nuccio, n.d) which focuses on "contact space"--- when more body surface areas (arms, leg, back, etc.) on the receiver are being used there are more opportunities, or wider bandwidth, for information to flow in.

More musings on this to come!

References

granda, a. & Nuccio, J. (n.d.) Protactile Principles. Text within the body of an e-mail received August 3, 2020 via Introduction to Protactile Theory (course by John Lee Clark).

Nicholas, J. (2010). From active touch to tactile communication--- what’s tactile cognition got to do with it? The Danish Resource Centre on Congenital Deafblindness.

Tactile Resolution and Attention

Heather Withrow
September 15, 2020

Here's another DeafBlind rabbit hole journey I'd like to share. (Or after reading this post, you might think that an elaborate rabbit warren would be a better analogy?) 

A lifetime ago, I studied for a B.A. in Graphic Design at Gallaudet University. It is still beneficial to me these days and I was pleasantly amused when it came to musing on the topic of tactile perception, information and resolution. A couple papers I have read (see references) and people’s thoughts have also converged in an exciting way for me. Such as:

• Learning more in 2018 about our somatosensory system, nerve density, tactile perception, and cognition in a 2010 paper by Jude Nicholas;
• Reading a very enlightening e-mail in spring 2019 from Oscar Chacon as he described his tactile experiences, describing different tactile interactions and mentioning ProTactile bringing “high resolution” connections; and
• Taking a truly profound, thought-provoking 4-week correspondence course this recent summer titled “Introduction to ProTactile Theory" led by John Lee Clark. This helped me understand much more about ProTactile and contact space. 

In this first post of a few, I’ll focus on a comparably small pearl of a takeaway from Jude Nicholas’ paper. 

Tactile Resolution: Nerve Density and Actively Attending

During one of my DeafBlind-focused graduate courses at Texas Tech, I came across a paper that was fascinating, overwhelming and worth re-reading several times: From active touch to tactile communication--- what’s tactile cognition got to do with it? by Jude Nicholas (2010). Nicholas (2010) wrote that the density of nerve endings in a specific area brings in more information than a large area of skin area perceiving tactile information. His paper included an illustration of a brain and a visual representation of body parts lined up just off the the brain's surface (Nicholas, 2010, p. 9). The body parts are visually exaggerated, not exactly in order and not in size proportion because they are decreased or increased in size according to its number of nerve endings. For example the hands and face are larger compared to the elbow, shoulders, and the rest of the lower body through to the toes. This is a visual representation that our face, eyes, lips, hands, fingers have a higher nerve density than the rest of our body.

Exploding into my mind was the analogy of resolution in visual print media that we know as pixels per inch (p.p.i.) being similar to the number of nerve endings for the amount of information perceived via touch. Perhaps another way of saying it is nerves per inch, “n.p.i.”? The higher density of nerve endings is similar to higher p.p.i. images. Images as you see it (without zooming in) on your computer monitor are shown in 72 p.p.i. resolution (low p.p.i.-> smaller file size-> easier web page loading... at least for in 1997 with dial-up Internet services!); photo prints are usually 300 p.p.i. You can go higher to 600 p.p.i. but 300 p.p.i. is already great. If you zoom in on an image locked at 72 p.p.i. on your computer, you will see jagged or blurry edges that are not well defined like higher p.p.i. images). (The numbers of pixels is controlled in how you plan to take photos, scan and create digital art that are eventually printed out.) This higher resolution via density of pixels in a single printed square inch brings us to the topic of nerve density throughout our bodies.

[Image: Comparison of image quality based on pixels per inch (if printed at 300 ppi).

Image created by Heather Withrow.]

Nicholas (2010) points out that many things we do still require tactile input anyway. Basically if an area on your skin area has a lower number nerve endings, akin to 72 pixels per inch, like the outside of your upper arm or all your toes, it still contributes to perception. It is using whatever is available and perceiving, thus helping information reach your brain for processing.

[Image: Comparison of high density and low density in dots.

Image created by Heather Withrow.]

Pixels per inch or density is just one of the working components of the brain show biz. In order for the brain to benefit from information coming through these nerve endings, the brain needs to be interested and paying attention to what may come (Nelson & van Dijk, n.d.). The hands, lips, whatever it is that is being used by a person to perceive, needs to be actively touching and interacting with the object at their own pace (Nicholas, 2010). This is another shout-out for giving DeafBlind people— babies, children and adults alike— time to explore… to think about what they’re feeling, the incoming information interacting with available pre-existing information in the brain and deciding on what to do next. Is it safe? Gross? Delightful? Toss it? What is being asked of me? Explore more? Speed-dice it and sauté it?

Since our back, outer thigh, arms, to name a few, do not actively interact like our dexterous feet and hands, they need to be freely and actively attending (the brain feeling via skin) to the tactile input in order for the mind to process what is going on. This is a nod toward people using ProTactile, how they use more of the receiver's body beyond tactile-signing only via hands. 

A functional example of paying attention is that you’d definitely feel the prick of a vaccine being delivered as you’re awake and dreading it. An example of not attending would be a when small snake drops onto you from a tree branch above as you’re in deep sleep during a camping trip, I would guess that you’d not shriek. You might continue to sleep or be startled awake but still unaware of the nope-rope's fall. Perhaps confused. Another example would be that you receive a generous swirl of cool whip sprayed onto your limp open hand as you sleep but only waking up a little to use the aforementioned hand to respond to a man-made itch on your nose.

Note: These pranks may or may not have actually happened.

Reference

Nelson, C. & van Dijk, J. (n.d.) Child-guided strategies for assessing children who are deafblind or have multiple disabilities. Netherlands: ivdmtw Noot Muis. AapNootMuis Productions.

Nicholas, J. (2010). From active touch to tactile communication--- what’s tactile cognition got to do with it? The Danish Resource Centre on Congenital Deafblindness.