A SECOND LOOK AT SENSORY DEPRIVATION

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
A classification of the variables in sensory deprivation as 1) alterations of sensory input, 2) persistent associated factors, and 3) intermittent associated factors. Four of the components selected from these groupings for detailed discussion (previously related to intentionally altered sensory stimuli) are sensory invariance, quantitative, (partial) sensory deprivation, sensory deprivation per se, and interpersonal isolation. The remaining 2 periods of reduced awareness and precipitating stimuli[long dash]are not the direct result of experimental contrivance. Which of these factors are significantly related to the production of symptoms has not been determined. Reduced awareness and precipitating internal and external stimuli appear to be necessary conditions for symptom formation. Constant sensory input (monotony of stimuli) is a more common experience than diminution or increase of stimuli, and hence cannot be excluded as central to the production of sensory deprivation symptoms A review of the quantitative alterations in sensory stimuli indicates that sensory deprivation experiments are partial rather than complete; that the critical limits are not known; and that the fact that all sensory deprivation is sub-maximal makes possible its study apart from the usual concomitant non-sensory factors, e. g., interpersonal isolation. If any 1 factor of the sensory deprivation complex is keyed to the symptoms that are produced, it would appear to be sensory deprivation per se; deprivation of none of the others can be effective within the short time periods involved. A combination of all 4 elements of the ensemble, however, has not been excluded as the central stress. But is must also be noted that none of the 4 elements has been proven to have causative significance. Interpersonal isolation in sensory deprivation experiments has not been adequately reported in the literature. Isolation alone produces the greatest deprivation at the conceptual level by eliminating symbolic communication. Since this is man''s highest function, most recently acquired phylogenetically and ontogenetically, there is reason to believe that it would be the most vulnerable deprivation.