Summary.Two experiments are reported. They are concerned with what have been described as:(i) The ‘non‐manipulation paradox,’ this being related to a stage in the development of haptic perception in which children of the age of about 2 1/2 years, when presented with objects or shapes for tactile examination, make little or no attempt to maximise the available information relating to their spatial configurations. Paradoxically, they are, nevertheless, able to identify by touch cues alone, many objects with extremely complex spatial configurations. In this experiment the textural characteristics of a group of objects was controlled, by carving models of them in wood. The results suggest thatimportant cues for recognition of objects at this age are textural rather than spatial.(ii) The ‘topological‐primacy hypothesis.’Piaget and Inhelder (1956) argue forcibly that the achievement of a spatial co‐ordinate system which is essentially linear is not complete until the age of about 8 or 9 years. They interpret the findings of their haptic shape perception experiments as indicating a gradual development from using ‘primitive’topologicalrelationships to usinglinearor Euclidean relationships based upon a vertical—horizontal system of co‐ordinates. This hypothesis was considered in a situation similar to that used by Piaget and Inhelder, but within the framework of an entirely different expermental design. The results of this investigation appear to indicate that, when a response is available equally to each of the two shape categories under consideration, the ‘topological‐primacy hypothesis’ requires to be repl