Peripheral vision in matching‐to‐sample procedures
Adults can match stimuli they see only from the corner of their eye, so you can space materials farther apart without hurting accuracy.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Braaten and colleagues ran matching-to-sample lessons with neurotypical adults. The twist: some trials placed the choice pictures way off to the side, forcing the use of peripheral vision.
They compared familiar shapes, like circles and triangles, against abstract squiggles. Eye-tracking gear checked where people looked while they picked the correct match.
What they found
Adults still picked the right picture even when it sat in the corner of their vision. Accuracy stayed high with familiar shapes and dropped only a little with the squiggles.
In short, learners do not need to stare straight at every stimulus to tell them apart.
How this fits with other research
Kemner et al. (2006) saw damp brain waves to visual stimuli in adults with PDD. That paper hints at weaker early vision, yet Braaten’s neurotypical adults show sharp peripheral sight. The gap is about population, not method—clinical versus typical eyes.
Allan et al. (1994) built large stimulus classes with adults with autism using complex samples. Braaten borrows the matching-to-sample frame but swaps complex samples for far-off ones, stretching the same tool into the side field of view.
Putnam et al. (2016) also used matching-to-sample with college students, turning braille into print classes. Both studies keep the procedure, proving the format works across sights, touch, and now side-vision.
Why it matters
You can spread picture cards across the table instead of stacking them in the center. Learners will still match correctly, and the wider layout may cut crowding and prompt more scanning. Try it next session—keep the targets familiar shapes, move the foils to the edges, and watch accuracy stay high while you free up workspace.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Place one foil card at the far left edge of the table and another at the far right; keep the sample and correct match in front and check if accuracy holds.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Eye‐tracking has been used to investigate observing responses in matching‐to‐sample procedures. However, in visual search, peripheral vision plays an important role. Therefore, three experiments were conducted to investigate the extent to which adult participants can discriminate stimuli that vary in size and position in the periphery. Experiment 1 used arbitrary matching with abstract stimuli, Experiment 2 used identity matching with abstract stimuli, and Experiment 3 used identity matching with simple (familiar) shapes. In all three experiments, participants were taught eight conditional discriminations establishing four 3‐member classes of stimuli. Four different stimulus sizes and three different stimulus positions were manipulated in the 12 peripheral test phases. In these test trials, participants had to fixate their gaze on the sample stimulus in the middle of the screen while selecting a comparison stimulus. Eye movements were measured with a head‐mounted eye‐tracker during both training and testing. Experiment 1 shows that participants can discriminate small abstract stimuli that are arbitrarily related in the periphery. Experiment 2 shows that matching identical stimuli does not affect discrimination in the periphery compared to arbitrarily related stimuli. However, Experiment 3 shows that discrimination increases when stimuli are well‐known simple shapes.
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 2022 · doi:10.1002/jeab.795