Integration of visual landmark cues in spatial memory

Newman, Phil; McNamara, Timothy P.

doi:10.1007/s00426-021-01581-8

Cited by 16 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The spatial position of the configuration's centroid was biased in the direction of the observer or the landmark shift, indicating the use of allocentric and egocentric cues. We also observed a rightward bias of the centroid with fewer available landmarks, possibly due to participants' right handedness (c.f., 18) and fewer spatial reference points to facilitate memory recall (19). Presenting fewer landmarks likely increases spatial uncertainty which can lead to a stronger reliance on egocentric cues (10).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Egocentric cues influence the spatial memory of landmark configurations for memory-guided actions

Forster

Fiehler

Karimpur

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Allocentric and egocentric reference frames are used to determine the spatial position of action targets in reference to objects in the environment, i.e., landmarks (allocentric), or the observer (egocentric). Previous research investigated reference frames in isolation, for example, by shifting landmarks relative to the target and asking participants to reach to the remembered target location. Systematic reaching errors were found in the direction of the landmark shift and used as a proxy for allocentric spatial coding. Here we examined the interaction of both allocentric and egocentric reference frames by shifting the landmarks as well as the observer. We asked participants to encode a 3D configuration of balls, and to reproduce this configuration from memory after a short delay followed by a landmark or observer shift. We also manipulated the number of landmarks to test its effect on the use of allocentric and egocentric reference frames. Shifting the observer resulted in larger configurational errors. In addition, an increase in the number of landmarks led to a stronger reliance on allocentric cues and a weaker contribution of egocentric cues. In sum, our results highlight the important role of egocentric cues for allocentric spatial coding in the context of memory-guided actions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Egocentric cues influence the spatial memory of landmark configurations for memory-guided actions

Forster

Fiehler

Karimpur

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In some reptiles and fish, creating more salience by including a greater number of spatial cues caused individuals to switch from a behavioral algorithm (e.g., a motor habit) to a more complex spatially based strategy (Hughes & Blight, 1999; Wilkinson et al, 2009). Another aspect of cue salience is the consistency of the cue across training trials; the more reliable the cue, the more salient it becomes, with individuals weighing that cue more heavily during navigation when compared with less reliable cues (reviewed in Newman & McNamara, 2022). Collectively, these studies indicate that altering cue prominence within the perceptual boundaries of the individual can create differential weighing of that cue during navigation, with implications on performance during spatial cognitive tasks.…”

Section: Switching Navigational Strategies and Integrating Cues Durin...mentioning

confidence: 99%

A reflection on noncognitive factors affecting spatial cognitive testing: Examples from nonmodel species.

LaDage¹,

Gould²,

Sturgill³

et al. 2023

Journal of Comparative Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Probing for spatial cognitive processes in model rodent species has a long history in the psychological literature, with well-established protocols and paradigms successfully revealing the mechanisms underlying spatial learning and memory. There has also been much interest in examining the ecological and evolutionary context of spatial cognition, with a focus on how selection has molded spatial cognitive abilities in nonmodel species, how spatial cognitive traits vary across species, the neural mechanisms underlying spatial cognitive abilities, and the fitness outcomes of spatial cognition. Behavioral ecologists have been able to take advantage of paradigms from experimental psychology's rich history of spatial cognitive testing for use in nonmodel species. However, as the field advances, it is important to highlight noncognitive factors that can impact performance on spatial cognitive tasks (e.g., motivation to perform the task, switching navigational strategies, variation across protocols, ecological relevance of the task), as these factors may explain discrepancies in findings among some studies. This review highlights how these noncognitive factors can differentially modulate performance on spatial cognitive tests in different nonmodel species. Accounting for these factors when creating protocols and paradigms allows for a more nuanced approach with more explanatory power when probing for spatial cognitive abilities in nonmodel species.

show abstract

“…The lack of visuospatial cues, therefore, has a profound impact on how the perception of spatial space can be altered (Park et al, 2021). Worse, in deep space, not only these essential cues but also the base terrain (e.g., ground) is unavailable, which usually exists on other planets (Newman and McNamara 2022). This makes spatial perception even more di cult in deep space.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of visuospatial cues on human spatial perception abilities

Salehi,

Pariafsai,

Dixit

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we conducted spatial perception tests, including distance perception (DP) and size perception (SP) tests, under various experimental conditions to investigate their effects on response accuracy and response time. Participants were divided into a control group (CG), Experimental group 1 (EG1), and Experimental group 2 (EG2). Significant differences were observed between CG and EG1, as well as between EG1 and EG2, with CG and EG2 showing higher response accuracy compared to EG1. Response time differences were also significant among the three groups. Further analysis revealed no significant difference in DP test accuracy means, indicating that limited or no availability of landmarks did not impact participants' distance perception. However, SP test accuracy showed a significant difference, suggesting that the presence or absence of landmarks influenced participants' ability to perceive size. Pairwise comparisons indicated that SP responses in CG and EG2 were more accurate than in EG1. Response time analysis showed a significant difference in SP test response time between EG1 and EG2, with EG1 having longer response times. Gender analysis in EG1 revealed that males performed more accurately than females in this test condition. Demographic factors such as age and gamer/non-gamer status did not significantly influence participants' response accuracy. Participants' performance on DP and SP tests revealed consistent overestimation of distance in the sagittal plane and underestimation in the frontal plane. SP test results indicated that most participants overestimated the height of the cube and underestimated its depth, with no significant gender or gamer/non-gamer differences. This study contributes valuable insights into the impact of experimental conditions on spatial perception, emphasizing the importance of considering these factors in designing tasks or interventions requiring spatial perception. The findings have implications for fields such as cognitive psychology, human-computer interaction, and virtual reality design.

show abstract

Integration of visual landmark cues in spatial memory

Cited by 16 publications

References 63 publications

Egocentric cues influence the spatial memory of landmark configurations for memory-guided actions

Egocentric cues influence the spatial memory of landmark configurations for memory-guided actions

A reflection on noncognitive factors affecting spatial cognitive testing: Examples from nonmodel species.

The impact of visuospatial cues on human spatial perception abilities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About