Human hippocampus and viewpoint dependence in spatial memory

King, John A.; Burgess, Neil; Hartley, Tom T.; Vargha‐Khadem, Faraneh; O’Keefe, John

doi:10.1002/hipo.10070

Cited by 247 publications

(261 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

240

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Response times increased as the angular discrepancy between the approach directions during training and test increased, suggesting that participants spatially transformed their viewpoint during configuration strategy responses. Therefore, configuration strategy responses rely on viewpoint-dependent place recognition, which has been shown to be hippocampus-dependent (King et al, 2002). This finding supports an account of place learning in which spatial knowledge is associated with views of landmarks experienced during learning (Hamilton et al, 2002).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

“…In the current paradigm, this process would rely on a viewpoint-dependent representation of an intersection (Shelton & McNamara, 2001;Wang & Spelke, 2002) subjected to mental rotation or perspective-taking transformations (see Hegarty & Waller, 2004), both of which have been implicated in a number of navigational tasks (Kozhevnikov, Motes, Rasch & Blajenkova, 2006). Such viewpoint-dependent place recognition should be sensitive to approach direction and would incur cognitive and time related costs that increased relative to the angular discrepancy between the approach directions experienced during training and test (Diwadkar & McNamara, 1997;King, Burgess, Hartley, Vargha-Khadem & O'Keefe, 2002). In contrast, direct access to a viewpoint-independent allocentric representation of an intersection should be independent of approach direction and would result in similar response times across all test trials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Human place and response learning: navigation strategy selection, pupil size and gaze behavior

Condappa

Wiener

2014

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we examined the cognitive processes and ocular behavior associated with on-going navigation strategy choice using a route learning paradigm that distinguishes between three different wayfinding strategies: an allocentric place strategy, and the egocentric associative cue and beacon response strategies. Participants approached intersections of a known route from a variety of directions, and were asked to indicate the direction in which the original route continued. Their responses in a subset of these test trials allowed the assessment of strategy choice over the course of six experimental blocks. The behavioral data revealed an initial maladaptive bias for a beacon response strategy, with shifts in favour of the optimal configuration place strategy occurring over the course of the experiment. Response time analysis suggests that the configuration strategy relied on spatial transformations applied to a viewpoint-dependent spatial representation, rather than direct access to an allocentric representation. Furthermore, pupillary measures reflected the employment of place and response strategies throughout the experiment, with increasing use of the more cognitively demanding configuration strategy associated with increases in pupil dilation. During test trials in which known intersections were approached from different directions, visual attention was directed to the landmark encoded during learning as well as the intended movement direction. Interestingly, the encoded landmark did not differ between the three navigation strategies, which is discussed in the context of initial strategy choice and the parallel acquisition of place and response knowledge.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 72%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human place and response learning: navigation strategy selection, pupil size and gaze behavior

Condappa

Wiener

2014

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The experimental paradigm used in the current study provides a new point of contact between neurophysiological studies of spatial representations (Ekstrom et al, 2003;Jeffery et al, 1997;Morris et al, 1982;, animal behavioral studies (Cheng, 1986(Cheng, ,1989Collett et al, 1986;Spetch et al, 1996Spetch et al, , 1997 and psychological investigations (Hermer & Spelke, 1994;King et al, 2002;Shelton & McNamara, 2001;Wang & Spelke, 2000), all of which can be brought to bear in interpreting our findings. Such contact is useful since it means that insights gained at the physiological level can inform experiments at the behavioral level, and vice versa.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hahnloser, 2003;Skaggs, Knierim, Kudrimoti, & McNaughton, 1995;Taube, 1998). Operation of this process could also help to explain the egocentric bias in reaction-time and performance measures often found in spatial memory (Diwadkar & McNamara, 1997; see also King et al, 2002) and increased performance in spatial memory tasks where novel viewpoints are aligned with distal cues (McNamara et al, 2003;Burgess et al, in press;Shelton & McNamara, 2001). …”

Section: Reference Framesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geometric determinants of human spatial memory

2004

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geometric alterations to the boundaries of a virtual environment were used to investigate the representations underlying human spatial memory. Subjects encountered a cue object in a simple rectangular enclosure, with distant landmarks for orientation. After a brief delay, during which they were removed from the arena, subjects were returned to it at a new location and orientation and asked to mark the place where the cue had been. On some trials the geometry (size, aspect ratio) of the arena was varied between presentation and testing. Responses tended to lie somewhere between a location that maintained fixed distances from nearby walls and a location that maintained fixed ratios of the distances between opposing walls. The former were more common after expansions and for cued locations nearer to the edge while the latter were more common after contractions and for locations nearer to the center. The spatial distributions of responses predicted by various simple geometric models were compared to the data. The best fitting model was one derived from the response properties of 'place cells' in the rat hippocampus, which matches the 'proximities' 1=ðd þ cÞ of the cue to the four walls of the arena, where d is the distance to a wall and c is a global constant. Subjects also tended to adopt the same orientation at presentation and testing, although this was not due to using a view matching strategy, which could be ruled out in 50% of responses. Disoriented responses were most often seen where the cued location was near the center of the arena or where the long axis of a rectangular arena was changed between presentation and testing, suggesting that the geometry of the arena acts as a weak cue to orientation. Overall, the results suggest a process of visual landmark matching to determine orientation, combined with an abstract representation of the proximity of the cued location to the walls of the arena consistent with the neural representation of location in the hippocampus. q

show abstract

“…Rondi-Reig et al (14) recently demonstrated that an additional sequential egocentric representation depends on the rodent hippocampus. The human hippocampus has likewise been associated with allocentric representations of location, allowing accurate navigation from new starting locations (15) based on the configuration of environmental cues (16,17) or recognition of locations from a new viewpoint (18,19). Similarly, navigation via a fixed route (15,17) or relative to a single landmark (16), consistent with simple egocentric representations, has been associated with the dorsal striatum.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Lateralized human hippocampal activity predicts navigation based on sequence or place memory

Igloi

Doeller

Berthoz

et al. 2010

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

252

184

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The hippocampus is crucial for both spatial navigation and episodic memory, suggesting that it provides a common function to both. Here we adapt a spatial paradigm, developed for rodents, for use with functional MRI in humans to show that activation of the right hippocampus predicts the use of an allocentric spatial representation, and activation of the left hippocampus predicts the use of a sequential egocentric representation. Both representations can be identified in hippocampal activity before their effect on behavior at subsequent choice-points. Our results suggest that, rather than providing a single common function, the two hippocampi provide complementary representations for navigation, concerning places on the right and temporal sequences on the left, both of which likely contribute to different aspects of episodic memory.T he hippocampus plays a crucial role in both spatial navigation and episodic memory (1-6). However, the nature of the fundamental hippocampal process or representation that might underlie both functions remains the subject of intense speculation, including suggestions that it is best characterized as associative (7), sequential (8), flexible relational (2), allocentric (1, 5, 9), or spatial contextual (4, 5). Similar speculation surrounds the nature of any lateralization of these representations (1, 5, 10), and whether the firing of hippocampal neurons in freely moving rodents reflects allocentric position, spatial context, or sequential position along a route (5, 11, 12). Here we show that the hippocampus predicts and supports navigation via sequential representations in the left hippocampus and allocentric spatial representations in the right hippocampus. These complementary lateralized representations suggest an explanation for the multiple hippocampal contributions to different aspects of spatial and episodic memory.Within spatial memory a distinction has been made between "allocentric" (world-centered) and "egocentric" (body-centered) representations, with allocentric (or place-learning) and simple egocentric (stimulus response-like) navigation shown to depend on the hippocampus and dorsal striatum, respectively, in rodents (5, 13). recently demonstrated that an additional sequential egocentric representation depends on the rodent hippocampus. The human hippocampus has likewise been associated with allocentric representations of location, allowing accurate navigation from new starting locations (15) based on the configuration of environmental cues (16, 17) or recognition of locations from a new viewpoint (18,19). Similarly, navigation via a fixed route (15, 17) or relative to a single landmark (16), consistent with simple egocentric representations, has been associated with the dorsal striatum. However, to our knowledge, the neural bases of the sequential egocentric representation have not yet been identified in humans, and could provide a link between spatial navigation and episodic memory.Here we adapt the Starmaze task developed for mice (14,20) to investigate the neural base...

show abstract

Human hippocampus and viewpoint dependence in spatial memory

Cited by 247 publications

References 47 publications

Human place and response learning: navigation strategy selection, pupil size and gaze behavior

Human place and response learning: navigation strategy selection, pupil size and gaze behavior

Geometric determinants of human spatial memory

Lateralized human hippocampal activity predicts navigation based on sequence or place memory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About