Executing the homebound path is a major source of error in homing by path integration.

Chrastil, Elizabeth R.; Warren, William H.

doi:10.1037/xhp0000875

Cited by 11 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Path Integration is notoriously inaccurate involving both systematic and random errors [4][5][6]. For example, systematic error include biases induced by execution and past experiences such as history effects from past trials [7][8][9][10]. Random errors include noise in the body-based idiothetic sensory cues as well as in the integration process itself.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combination and competition between path integration and landmark navigation in the estimation of heading direction

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Successful navigation requires the ability to compute one’s location and heading from incoming multisensory information. Previous work has shown that this multisensory input comes in two forms: body-based idiothetic cues, from one’s own rotations and translations, and visual allothetic cues, from the environment (usually visual landmarks). However, exactly how these two streams of information are integrated is unclear, with some models suggesting the body-based idiothetic and visual allothetic cues are combined, while others suggest they compete. In this paper we investigated the integration of body-based idiothetic and visual allothetic cues in the computation of heading using virtual reality. In our experiment, participants performed a series of body turns of up to 360 degrees in the dark with only a brief flash (300ms) of visual feedback en route. Because the environment was virtual, we had full control over the visual feedback and were able to vary the offset between this feedback and the true heading angle. By measuring the effect of the feedback offset on the angle participants turned, we were able to determine the extent to which they incorporated visual feedback as a function of the offset error. By further modeling this behavior we were able to quantify the computations people used. While there were considerable individual differences in performance on our task, with some participants mostly ignoring the visual feedback and others relying on it almost entirely, our modeling results suggest that almost all participants used the same strategy in which idiothetic and allothetic cues are combined when the mismatch between them is small, but compete when the mismatch is large. These findings suggest that participants update their estimate of heading using a hybrid strategy that mixes the combination and competition of cues.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combination and competition between path integration and landmark navigation in the estimation of heading direction

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The current study showed no evidence of effects of Perspective Shift or Target Distance on distance errors in the iVTT. Producing the target distance may not have been challenging in this task because 1) the total distance people need to reproduce was fairly short (less than 2.7 m, although that is not too far from many path integration studies) (Loomis et al, 1993;Loomis and Knapp, 2003;Chrastil and Warren, 2021), so that the distances are relevantly easy for participants to estimate and produce; and 2) the walls of the circular arena could serve as a cue for participants to gauge the distance, which may make the long distances as easy as short distances close to the body. Previous research has shown that environmental boundaries and geometry enable mammals, including humans, to learn the scale and functional affordances of the environment (Barry et al, 2006;Solstad et al, 2008;Lever et al, 2009;Ferrara and Park, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A new psychometric task measuring spatial perspective taking in ambulatory virtual reality

He¹,

Chrastil²,

Hegarty³

2022

Front. Virtual Real.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spatial perspective taking is an essential cognitive ability that enables people to imagine how an object or scene would appear from a perspective different from their current physical viewpoint. This process is fundamental for successful navigation, especially when people utilize navigational aids (e.g., maps) and the information provided is shown from a different perspective. Research on spatial perspective taking is primarily conducted using paper-pencil tasks or computerized figural tasks. However, in daily life, navigation takes place in a three-dimensional (3D) space and involves movement of human bodies through space, and people need to map the perspective indicated by a 2D, top down, external representation to their current 3D surroundings to guide their movements to goal locations. In this study, we developed an immersive viewpoint transformation task (iVTT) using ambulatory virtual reality (VR) technology. In the iVTT, people physically walked to a goal location in a virtual environment, using a first-person perspective, after viewing a map of the same environment from a top-down perspective. Comparing this task with a computerized version of a popular paper-and-pencil perspective taking task (SOT: Spatial Orientation Task), the results indicated that the SOT is highly correlated with angle production error but not distance error in the iVTT. Overall angular error in the iVTT was higher than in the SOT. People utilized intrinsic body axes (front/back axis or left/right axis) similarly in the SOT and the iVTT, although there were some minor differences. These results suggest that the SOT and the iVTT capture common variance and cognitive processes, but are also subject to unique sources of error caused by different cognitive processes. The iVTT provides a new immersive VR paradigm to study perspective taking ability in a space encompassing human bodies, and advances our understanding of perspective taking in the real world.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combination and competition between path integration and landmark navigation in the estimation of heading direction

Harootonian

Ekstrom

Wilson

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Successful navigation requires the ability to compute one’s location and heading from incoming multisensory information. Previous work has shown that this multisensory input comes in two forms: body-based idiothetic cues, from one’s own rotations and translations, and visual allothetic cues, from the environment (usually visual landmarks). However, exactly how these two streams of information are integrated is unclear, with some models suggesting the body-based idiothetic and visual allothetic cues are combined, while others suggest they compete. In this paper we investigated the integration of bodybased idiothetic and visual allothetic cues in the computation of heading using virtual reality. In our experiment, participants performed a series of body turns of up to 360 degrees in the dark with only a brief flash (300ms) of visual feedback en route. Because the environment was virtual, we had full control over the visual feedback and were able to vary the offset between this feedback and the true heading angle. By measuring the effect of the feedback offset on the angle participants turned, we were able to determine the extent to which they incorporated visual feedback as a function of the offset error. By further modeling this behavior we were able to quantify the computations people used. While there were considerable individual differences in performance on our task, with some participants mostly ignoring the visual feedback and others relying on it almost entirely, our modeling results suggest that almost all participants used the same strategy in which idiothetic and allothetic cues are combined when the mismatch between them is small, but compete when the mismatch is large. These findings suggest that participants update their estimate of heading using a hybrid strategy that mixes the combination and competition of cues.

show abstract

Executing the homebound path is a major source of error in homing by path integration.

Cited by 11 publications

References 73 publications

Combination and competition between path integration and landmark navigation in the estimation of heading direction

Combination and competition between path integration and landmark navigation in the estimation of heading direction

A new psychometric task measuring spatial perspective taking in ambulatory virtual reality

Combination and competition between path integration and landmark navigation in the estimation of heading direction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About