Associative Basis of Landmark Learning and Integration in Vertebrates

Abstract

Early work on spatial navigation evaluated what stimuli (kinesthetic or extra-maze) support small-scale navigation and the nature of the underlying learning (place versus response) process. Contemporary research has focused primarily on how cues interact to determine spatial search. This review covers three general findings from research on landmark-based spatial search in vertebrates. First, pigeons and rats encode simple spatial maps in both open-field and touchscreen environments. Second, a nascent literature shows how simple maps can be integrated into complex maps through higher-order associative processes. The spatial-integration hypothesis provides an associative mechanism for spatial mapping that serves as an alternative to a previously posed configural mechanism. Finally, the evidence for associative cue-competition phenomena in landmark learning is reviewed-focusing on blocking and overshadowing. These findings support a role for associative learning in spatial tasks and provide a powerful explanatory framework for understanding cue integration and competition effects in landmark learning.

Path planning versus cue responding: a bio-inspired model of switching between navigation strategies

“…Experimental evidence suggests that different memory systems favor separate sets of sensory cues: DLS-mediated system mostly uses proximal cues (e.g., visible platform in the Morris Water Maze, or intra-maze landmark signaling the platform position), whereas Hc-mediated system encodes configurations of distal cues (like extra-maze landmarks and environmental boundaries) (McDonald et al 2004;Hartley and Burgess 2005;Leising and Blaisdell 2009;Blaisdell 2009;Pearce 2009). Distal cues and environmental boundaries can be used to form a spatial representation encoded in the activities of location selective neurons (termed "Place Cells") residing in the Hc (O'Keefe and Dostrovsky 1971;O'Keefe and Nadel 1978;Redish 1999;Save and Poucet 2000;Kelly and Gibson 2007).…”

Hippocampal contribution to vector model hypothesis during cue-dependent navigation

“…While similar to a cognitive map, the model has been interpreted as involving a simpler representation, developed through associative processes, rather than an "all-or-none" manner (Collett et al 1986;Pearce et al 2004;Esber et al 2005;Leising and Blaisdell 2009). This model suggests that animals can use multiple cues in the form of vectors (containing directional and distance information) to guide them to a goal (Collett et al 1986).…”

Analyzing Interactions between Cue-Guided and Place-Based Navigation with a Computational Model of Action Selection: Influence of Sensory Cues and Training

“…In particular conditions, these interaction may be more complex. For example, under the hypothesis that all spatial cues compete for predicting reward, numerous experiments supporting associative theory emphasize blocking (i.e., when a well learned cue predicting reward prevents learning of a novel cue predicting the same reward) or overshadowing effects (i.e., when one cue predicting the reward detracts the learning of another present cue able to predict the same reward) in navigation [18]. Some of these effects are challenged by experiments supporting the cognitive mapping theory (e.g., [3]).…”