Table 1.

Summary of the positive and negative evidence or problems = raised by studies on sensory substitution.

	Behavior			Required training		Subjective changes		Neurological changes
Evidence	New localization and identification abilities	Limits in number of objects, role of familiarity with the object	Regress or break in transparent access	Necessary	Role of practice vs. explicit rules. Patterns of generalization	Qualitative change after training	No clear modality	Neurological plasticity in V1 for trained blind users	Is it “visual” activity? Are changes limited to visual areas?
Perceptual models	+			±	±	+		±
Reading-like model	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	±

The table highlights how well each model handles or is capable of handling the existing empirical evidence (+, accounted; ±, possibly accounted; blank, not accounted). It should be clear that the reading-like model does better than perceptual models.