Previous studies of tactile acuity on the fingertip using passive touch have demonstrated an age-related decline in spatial resolution for both sighted and blind subjects. We have re-examined this age dependence with two newly designed tactile-acuity charts requiring active exploration of the test symbols. One chart used dot patterns similar to Braille and the other used embossed Landolt rings. Groups of blind Braille readers and sighted subjects, ranging in age from 12 to 85 years, were tested in two experiments. We replicated previous findings for sighted subjects by showing an age related decrease in tactile acuity by nearly 1% per year. Surprisingly, the blind subjects retained high acuity into old age showing no age-related decline. For the blind subjects, tactile acuity did not correlate with braille reading speed, the amount of daily reading, or the age at which braille was learned. We conclude that when measured with active touch, blind subjects retain high tactile acuity into old age, unlike their aging sighted peers. We propose that blind people's use of active touch in daily activities, not specifically Braille reading, results in preservation of tactile acuity across the lifespan.

Bauman and Kropf (1979) surveyed assessment professionals who were working with persons with visual impairments (that is, those who were blind or had low vision) to quantify their use of and satisfaction with measures of, among other things, cognitive ability. Their survey revealed the dominance of the Wechsler scales and some ambivalence associated with the use of existing tests, thus pointing to the need to "develop something better" (p. 261). From their data, Bauman and Kropf concluded that "[assessors] are trying everything and satisfied with almost nothing. Research is needed!" (p. 261). This article reports on a study that was a limited replication of Bauman and Kropf's study, to determine whether and to what extent the situation has improved.Current assessment practice demands both dynamic and psychometric approaches, with norm-referenced tests requiring adequate representation of the demographic and sensory characteristics of the examinee in the norming sample (Bradley-Johnson, 1994;Bradley-Johnson & Ekstrom, 1999). These demands are empirically founded. Performance on nonverbal cognitive tasks differs as a function of visual status and history (

The Gambling Functional Assessment (GFA; Dixon & Johnson, 2007) is a 20-item self-report inventory identifying four potential consequences maintaining gambling behavior. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses are performed for two large, nonclinical samples of university undergraduates. For the exploratory analysis, the optimal model yields two factors: Positive Reinforcement (correlated with GFA Sensory, Attention, and Tangible scores) and Negative Reinforcement (correlated with GFA Escape scores). One GFA item fails to load on either factor adequately. Factor loadings are confirmed using structural equation modeling for the second sample. The resulting model yields a mix of adequate and suboptimal fit indicators. Although the 2-factor model of the GFA has great theoretical utility and shows significant promise, confirmation within clinical samples of gamblers will be necessary to further validate the model. GFA Escape scores are uniquely distributed in the two samples and may represent functions most likely to maintain pathological gambling.

Nonverbal/spatial tests are unavailable for persons with visual impairments, despite decades of documented need and developmental effort. Because past tactile analogs of block design (BD) tests have not been widely accepted, known BD test parameters were compared across visual and tactile designs to assess the applicability of the test across modalities. Contrary to expectations, edge-cueing of designs with no perceptual cohesiveness (PC) improved tactile and visual performance. The expected PC by cueing and field independence (FI) by PC interactions were found for visual, but not tactile, BD. Uncued tactile designs elicited more errors, tending to occur closer to the center of the designs. These data suggest that visual and tactile BD performance cannot be interpreted similarly. Differences may be due to to modality-specific demand for various encoding and recoding abilities. The standing model is expanded to account for cross-modality differences in BD performance by including both rotation and block segregation.

An attempt was made to modify the Gambling Functional Assessment (GFA), which was proposed to identify four possible contingencies maintaining the respondent's gambling behavior. However, previous research found that it only identified two contingencies (i.e., positive vs. negative reinforcement), with some items cross-loading on both contingencies and one not loading at all. A total of 1,060 undergraduate students completed a revised version of the GFA containing 22 items. Exploratory factor analyses conducted on a random selection of half of the participants led to a two-factor solution (positive and negative reinforcement) for 16 of the items that strongly loaded on the two factors. Confirmatory factor analyses conducted using structural equation modeling on the data from the other half of the sample confirmed the two-factor model. The GFA-Revised consists of 16 items, 8 each measuring positive and negative reinforcement contingencies. Although this revised measure cleanly parses the two contingencies, the data indicate that gambling maintained by positive reinforcement is more frequent than gambling maintained by negative reinforcement. This outcome will make directly comparing the two contingencies difficult, especially given that evidence suggests that gambling maintained by negative reinforcement is more strongly associated with pathology than gambling maintained by positive reinforcement.