Egocentric organization of spatial activities in imagined navigation

Abstract

Studies on spatial frameworks suggest that the way we locate objects in imagined environments is influenced by the physical and functional properties of the world and our body. The present study provides evidence that such an influence also characterizes imagined navigation. In Experiment 1, participants followed spatial directions to construct an imagined path, while either keeping constant or updating their orientation at each step. A pattern of step times diagnostic of spatial frameworks was obtained in the updated-orientation but not in the constant-orientation condition. In Experiment 2, participants performed the updated-orientation condition with two levels of external support for the reference frame being used.Step times conformed to the predictions of spatial frameworks in both conditions. Both experiments also provided support that the processes involved in imagined navigation exhibit the operator-operand dynamics of other mental skills previously documented in the mental arithmetic domain. These results reinforce Piaget's (1954) notion that spatial displacements and integer arithmetic share a set of structural characteristics.

Spatial frameworks in imagined navigation

“…On the other hand, in the one condition in which participants interpreted directional terms based on their physical egocentric reference frames, a different result pattern was obtained. Replicating the previous results of Avraamides and Carlson (2003) for this condition, moving to the front was faster than moving to the left or right, which in turn was faster than moving to the back.…”

“…Results that can be accounted for by Mou et al's (2004) model are provided by an earlier study conducted by Avraamides and Carlson (2003). Participants in that study were presented with a 12 12 checkerboard grid and were asked to mentally trace a path in it by continuously interpreting directions and distances (e.g., left three squares).…”

“…Furthermore, the difficulties are even greater when the task involves interpreting the directional terms left and right (Avraamides, 2003). Because Avraamides and Carlson's (2003) updatedorientation condition (unlike their constant-orientation condition) presumably entailed constructing a secondary imagined reference frame that was misaligned with the physical body more often than not, one would expect that (1) performance would be overall inferior in the updatedorientation condition, and (2) moving to the left or right would be particularly slow in that condition, thus contributing to the emergence of spatial frameworks. Both of these findings were reported by Avraamides and Carlson.…”

“…However, the absence of the expected pattern in the constant-orientation condition indicates that caution should be used in applying the model. Avraamides and Carlson (2003) argued that the occasional reorienting of the facing direction might be an important prerequisite for spatial framework results, since it forces participants to continuously evaluate the mappings between directional terms and the space (previous studies using the spatial framework paradigm typically involved reorientations of an imagined egocentric reference frame). This is in line with the postulates of Mou et al's (2004) model.…”

“…Specifically, we aimed to examine whether a frequently updated reference frame is indeed a prerequisite for spatial frameworks, or whether a misaligned imagined reference frame alone would suffice. We have modified the task from Avraamides and Carlson (2003) to include conditions in which participants interpret directional terms using reference frames that are constant but misaligned with respect to the physical reference frame. For example, one group of participants were asked to imagine themselves starting out facing to the right (90º clockwise misalignment with respect to their physical facing direction) and to keep facing to the right when completing each movement.…”