Is Navigation in Virtual Reality with fMRI Really Navigation?

Abstract

Identifying the neural mechanisms underlying spatial orientation and navigation has long posed a challenge for researchers. Multiple approaches incorporating a variety of techniques and animal models have been used to address this issue. More recently, virtual navigation has become a popular tool for understanding navigational processes. Although combining this technique with functional imaging can provide important information on many aspects of spatial navigation, it is important to recognize some of the limitations these techniques have for gaining a complete understanding of the neural mechanisms of navigation. Foremost among these is that, when participants perform a virtual navigation task in a scanner, they are lying motionless in a supine position while viewing a video monitor. Here, we provide evidence that spatial orientation and navigation rely to a large extent on locomotion and its accompanying activation of motor, vestibular, and proprioceptive systems. Researchers should therefore consider the impact on the absence of these motion-based systems when interpreting virtual navigation/functional imaging experiments to achieve a more accurate understanding of the mechanisms underlying navigation.

Geo-EEG: Towards the Use of EEG in the Study of Urban Behaviour

“…The VR approach has been criticised on the basis that exploring, learning and navigating in a virtual environment is radically different to the conditions of real environment (Taube et al 2013). Neural activity between moving and static conditions seems to differ: in animal studies, theta oscillations are attenuated during VR, and Taube et al (2013) conclude that Bit is not known whether the amplitude and characteristics of this theta [oscillations] are the same as during active locomotion^ (Taube et al 2013).…”

“…Neural activity between moving and static conditions seems to differ: in animal studies, theta oscillations are attenuated during VR, and Taube et al (2013) conclude that Bit is not known whether the amplitude and characteristics of this theta [oscillations] are the same as during active locomotion^ (Taube et al 2013). This may be due to major perceptual differences because in VR the person is immobile.…”

The human hippocampus beyond the cognitive map: evidence from a densely amnesic patient

“…However, other studies (Cave and Squire, 1991; Mayes et al, 1991), including studies using “real-world” tasks designed to emulate spatial memory tasks used in rodents (Bohbot et al, 1998; Bohbot and Corkin, 2007), have produced seemingly inconsistent results suggesting that the hippocampus might not be essential for allocentric spatial learning and memory in humans. Since it is clear that we must use caution when comparing results across human and animal studies using different methodologies (Ravassard et al, 2013; Taube et al, 2013), it is imperative that humans also be tested with paradigms that emulate as closely as possible those used in animals. Studies in which subjects can move about freely in a real-world environment, and therefore perceive and integrate coherent visual, vestibular, proprioceptive, motor efferent copy, somesthetic and auditory information, should be carried out in order to further asses human spatial memory processes (Banta Lavenex et al, 2011; Taube et al, 2013).…”

Floor Plan Connectivity Influences Wayfinding Performance in Virtual Environments

“…Thus, experiments using desktop VEs can be performed conveniently and inexpensively in a laboratory setting. Navigation in desktop VEs lacks the self-motion information provided by the vestibular, proprioceptive, and motor systems during real-world navigation, leading some to question the extent to which non-immersive VEs are able to faithfully recreate the experience of real-world navigation (Taube, Valerio, & Yoder, 2013). Although there is considerable debate regarding the concordance between virtual and real-world navigation, numerous studies have applied VR and desktop VE techniques to study wayfinding (Haq, Hill, & Pramanik, 2005;Jansen-Osmann, Schmid, & Heil, 2007;Jiang & Li, 2009;Tang, Wu, & Lin, 2009;Witmer, Bailey, Knerr, & Parsons, 1996).…”