Search

Relying on shared tasks and stimuli to conduct research can enhance the replicability of findings and allow a community of researchers to collect large data sets across multiple experiments. This approach is particularly relevant for experiments in spatial navigation, which often require the development of unfamiliar large-scale virtual environments to test participants. One challenge with shared platforms is that undetected technical errors, rather than being restricted to individual studies, become pervasive across many studies. Here, we discuss the discovery of a software bug in a virtual environment platform used to investigate individual differences in spatial navigation: Virtual Silcton. The bug, which was difficult to detect for several reasons, resulted in storing the absolute value of a direction in a pointing task rather than the signed direction and rendered the original sign of the direction unrecoverable. To assess the impact of the bug on published findings, we collected a new data set for comparison. Results revealed that although the bug caused suppression in pointing errors and had different effects across people (less accurate navigators had more suppression), the effect of the bug on published data is small, partially explaining the difficulty in detecting the bug. We also used the new data set to develop a tool that allows researchers who have previously used Virtual Silcton to evaluate the impact of the bug on their findings. We summarize the ways that shared open materials, shared data, and collaboration can pave the way for better science to prevent errors in the future.

Research on the existence of cognitive maps and on the cognitive processes that support effective navigation has often focused on functioning across individuals. However, there are pronounced individual differences in navigation proficiency, which need to be explained and which can illuminate our understanding of cognitive maps and effective navigation. Using a virtual environment involving 2 routes (Virtual Silcton, a desktop virtual environment; Weisberg, Schinazi, Newcombe, Shipley, & Epstein, 2014), we divided people into 3 groups based on their within-route and between-route pointing accuracy: integrators, non-integrators, and imprecise navigators. In Study 1, we found that imprecise navigators have lower spatial and verbal working memory, which may limit their ability to build accurate within-route representations. We also found that integrators maintain excellent memories of buildings as categorized by route membership, possibly supporting the idea of hierarchical representations of the environment. In Study 2, we assessed preferences regarding place and route learning using a virtual version of the rodent T-maze (Marchette, Bakker, & Shelton, 2011). Integrators found more goals overall, and although they did not have an overall preference for a place-based strategy, integrators who did choose a place-based strategy found more goals. The opposite was true for imprecise navigators. In Study 3, we added a monetary incentive for accuracy to evaluate whether increased motivation leads to fewer participants classified as imprecise, but found no significant change in the distribution of performance. These data have theoretical implications for the cognitive map hypothesis, and practical implications for improving navigational functioning. A one-size-fits-all approach may fit none.

Although the hippocampus is implicated in both spatial navigation and associative memory, very little is known about whether individual differences in the 2 domains covary. People who prefer to navigate using a hippocampal-dependent place strategy may show better performance on associative memory tasks than those who prefer a caudate-dependent response strategy (Bohbot, Gupta, Banner, & Dahmani, 2011), but not all studies suggest such an effect (Woollett & Maguire, 2009, 2012). Here we tested nonexpert young adults and found that preference for a place strategy positively correlated with spatial (object-location) associative memory performance but did not correlate with nonspatial (face-name) associative memory performance. Importantly, these correlations differed from each other, indicating that the relation between navigation strategy and associative memory is specific to the spatial domain. In addition, the 2 associative memory tasks significantly correlated, suggesting that object-location memory taps into processes relevant to both hippocampal-dependent navigation and nonspatial associative memory. Our findings also suggest that individual differences in spatial associative memory may account for some of the variance in navigation strategies.

There are marked individual differences in the formation of cognitive maps both in the real world and in virtual environments (VE; e.g., Blajenkova, Motes, & Kozhevnikov, 2005; Chai & Jacobs, 2010; Ishikawa & Montello, 2006; Wen, Ishikawa, & Sato, 2011). These differences, however, are poorly understood and can be difficult to assess except by self-report methods. VEs offer an opportunity to collect objective data in environments that can be controlled and standardized. In this study, we designed a VE consisting of buildings arrayed along 2 separated routes, allowing for differentiation of between-route and within-route representation. Performance on a pointing task and a model-building task correlated with self-reported navigation ability. However, for participants with lower levels of between-route pointing, the Santa Barbara Sense of Direction scale (Hegarty, Richardson, Montello, Lovelace, & Subbiah, 2002) did not predict individual differences in accuracy when pointing to buildings within the same route. Thus, we confirm the existence of individual differences in the ability to construct a cognitive map of an environment, identify both the strengths and the potential weaknesses of self-report measures, and isolate a dimension that may help to characterize individual differences more completely. The VE designed for this study provides an objective behavioral measure of navigation ability that can be widely used as a research tool.

The relation of spatial skills to academic success in areas such as math and science has sparked discussion in early education around how spatial thinking skills might be included in early schooling. Planning and evaluating new curricula or interventions requires understanding these skills and having the means to assess them. Prior developmental research focused primarily on one aspect of dynamic spatial transformations (DST), namely mental rotation. This study broadens our knowledge by addressing another important DST, namely mental folding. We devised a new test suitable for young children. Performance of 180 children between 4 and 7?years suggests that mental folding appears at around 5.5?years of age, although there were also marked individual differences. These data on the emergence of DST suggest that educational programs targeting this skill could start in preschool or kindergarten and provide a means to assess the effectiveness of such efforts. (Contains 1 table and 3 figures.)

Spatial skills are a central component of intellect and show marked individual differences. There is evidence that variations in the spatial language young children hear, which directs their attention to important aspects of the spatial environment, may be one of the mechanisms that contributes to these differences. To investigate how play affects variations in language, parents and children were assigned to 1 of 3 conditions: free play with blocks, guided play, or play with preassembled structures (Study 1). Parents in the guided play condition produced significantly higher proportions of spatial talk than parents in the other two conditions, and children in the guided play condition produced significantly more spatial talk than those in the free play condition. Study 2 established baselines of spatial language during activities not involving spatial materials. Proportions of spatial words were lower than those in any of the conditions of Experiment 1. In sum, interaction with blocks naturally elicits elevated levels of spatial language, especially in the context of guided play, suggesting simple-to-execute educational interventions.

The relationship between emergent spatial understanding in different cognitive domains, including navigation and language, has rarely been studied using methods that allow for the examination of individual differences. In this study the authors explored emergent place learning and its relationship to early spatial language, namely prepositions, in 16- to 24-month-old children. Children were tested using a spatial task adapted from the Morris water maze, and the MacArthur Communicative Development Inventory. In the place-learning task, children were placed in a circular enclosure and a puzzle was hidden under the floor at one location. Before each trial, children were disoriented and placed in the maze at a different starting position. Their search types and success at finding the puzzle were coded. As expected, older children demonstrated more spatial searches and better place-learning skills (finding the goal), as well as greater overall expressive vocabulary. Place learning and language did not correlate with each other once age was partialled, with one crucial exception: a theoretically predicted correlation between prepositions and goal localization. (Contains 2 tables and 5 figures.)

The aim of this issue is to take stock of cognitive science of human variation in the field of spatial navigation, an important domain in which debates have often assumed an invariant human mind. Addressing the challenge of individual differences requires cognitive scientists to change their practices in several ways. First, we need to consider how to design measures and paradigms that have adequate psychometric characteristics. Second, using reliable, efficient, and valid measures, we need to examine how people vary from time to time, both in the short run due to emotions, such as stress or time pressure, and in the longer run, due to training or living in physical environments that require wayfinding skills. Third, we need to study people different from the traditional college participants, including variations in age, gender, education, culture, physical environment, and possible interactions among these variables. This issue assesses how human spatial navigation differs: within individuals across short‐term variations in mood or stress, and between individuals across variations in age, gender, education, culture, and physical environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research on spatial thinking requires reliable and valid measures of individual differences in various component skills. Spatial perspective taking (PT)—the ability to represent viewpoints different from one's own—is one kind of spatial skill that is especially relevant to navigation. This study had two goals. First, the psychometric properties of four PT tests were examined: Four Mountains Task (FMT), Spatial Orientation Task (SOT), Perspective‐Taking Task for Adults (PTT‐A), and Photographic Perspective‐Taking Task (PPTT). Using item response theory (IRT), item difficulty, discriminability, and efficiency of item information functions were evaluated. Second, the relation of PT scores to general intelligence, working memory, and mental rotation (MR) was assessed. All tasks showed good construct validity except for FMT. PPTT tapped a wide range of PT ability, with maximum measurement precision at average ability. PTT‐A captured a lower range of ability. Although SOT contributed less measurement information than other tasks, it did well across a wide range of PT ability. After controlling for general intelligence and working memory, original and IRT‐refined versions of PT tasks were each related to MR. PTT‐A and PPTT showed relatively more divergent validity from MR than SOT. Tests of dimensionality indicated that PT tasks share one common PT dimension, with secondary task‐specific factors also impacting the measurement of individual differences in performance. Advantages and disadvantages of a hybrid PT test that includes a combination of items across tasks are discussed. This study examined the psychometric properties of four tests of spatial perspective‐taking using item response theory, as well as relations with general intelligence, working memory, and mental rotation. Three showed good construct validity. Tests shared a common dimension, with secondary task‐specific factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The proposal that humans can develop cognitive maps of their environment has a long and controversial history. We suggest an individual-differences approach to this question instead of a normative one. Specifically, there is evidence that some people derive flexible maplike representations from information acquired during navigation, whereas others store much less accurate information. Our research uses a virtual-reality paradigm in which two routes are learned and must be related to each other. It defines three groups: integrators, nonintegrators, and imprecise navigators. These groups show distinctive patterns of spatial skills and working memory, as well as personality. We contrast our approach with research challenging the cognitive-map hypothesis and offer directions for rapprochement between the two views. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How does gesturing during route learning relate to subsequent spatial performance? We examined the relationship between gestures produced spontaneously while studying route directions and spatial representations of the navigated environment. Participants studied route directions, then navigated those routes from memory in a virtual environment, and finally had their memory of the environment assessed. We found that, for navigators with low spatial perspective-taking performance on the Spatial Orientation Test, more gesturing from a survey perspective predicted more accurate memory following navigation. Thus, co-thought gestures accompanying route learning relate to performance selectively, depending on the gesturers’ spatial ability and the perspective of their gestures. Survey gestures may help some individuals visualize an overall route that they can retain in memory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research on the existence of cognitive maps and on the cognitive processes that support effective navigation has often focused on functioning across individuals. However, there are pronounced individual differences in navigation proficiency, which need to be explained and which can illuminate our understanding of cognitive maps and effective navigation. Using a virtual environment involving 2 routes (Virtual Silcton, a desktop virtual environment; Weisberg, Schinazi, Newcombe, Shipley, & Epstein, 2014), we divided people into 3 groups based on their within-route and between-route pointing accuracy: integrators, non-integrators, and imprecise navigators. In Study 1, we found that imprecise navigators have lower spatial and verbal working memory, which may limit their ability to build accurate within-route representations. We also found that integrators maintain excellent memories of buildings as categorized by route membership, possibly supporting the idea of hierarchical representations of the environment. In Study 2, we assessed preferences regarding place and route learning using a virtual version of the rodent T-maze (Marchette, Bakker, & Shelton, 2011). Integrators found more goals overall, and although they did not have an overall preference for a place-based strategy, integrators who did choose a place-based strategy found more goals. The opposite was true for imprecise navigators. In Study 3, we added a monetary incentive for accuracy to evaluate whether increased motivation leads to fewer participants classified as imprecise, but found no significant change in the distribution of performance. These data have theoretical implications for the cognitive map hypothesis, and practical implications for improving navigational functioning. A one-size-fits-all approach may fit none. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Spatial scaling is an integral aspect of many spatial tasks that involve symbol-to-referent correspondences (e.g., map reading, drawing). In this study, we asked 3–6-year-olds and adults to locate objects in a two-dimensional spatial layout using information from a second spatial representation (map). We examined how scaling factor and reference features, such as the shape of the layout or the presence of landmarks, affect performance. Results showed that spatial scaling on this simple task undergoes considerable development, especially between 3 and 5 years of age. Furthermore, the youngest children showed large individual variability and profited from landmark information. Accuracy differed between scaled and un-scaled items, but not between items using different scaling factors (1:2 vs. 1:4), suggesting that participants encoded relative rather than absolute distances. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Spatial representation and thinking have evolutionary importance for any mobile organism. In addition, they help reasoning in domains that are not obviously spatial, for example, through the use of graphs and diagrams. This article reviews the literature suggesting that mental spatial transformation abilities, while present in some precursory form in infants, toddlers, and preschool children, also undergo considerable development and show important individual differences, which are malleable. These findings provide the basis for thinking about how to promote spatial thinking in preschools, at home, and in children's play. Integrating spatial content into formal and informal instruction could not only improve spatial functioning in general but also reduce differences related to gender and socioeconomic status that may impede full participation in a technological society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the hippocampus is implicated in both spatial navigation and associative memory, very little is known about whether individual differences in the 2 domains covary. People who prefer to navigate using a hippocampal-dependent place strategy may show better performance on associative memory tasks than those who prefer a caudate-dependent response strategy (Bohbot, Gupta, Banner, & Dahmani, 2011), but not all studies suggest such an effect (Woollett & Maguire, 2009, 2012). Here we tested nonexpert young adults and found that preference for a place strategy positively correlated with spatial (object-location) associative memory performance but did not correlate with nonspatial (face-name) associative memory performance. Importantly, these correlations differed from each other, indicating that the relation between navigation strategy and associative memory is specific to the spatial domain. In addition, the 2 associative memory tasks significantly correlated, suggesting that object-location memory taps into processes relevant to both hippocampal-dependent navigation and nonspatial associative memory. Our findings also suggest that individual differences in spatial associative memory may account for some of the variance in navigation strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are marked individual differences in the formation of cognitive maps both in the real world and in virtual environments (VE; e.g., Blajenkova, Motes, & Kozhevnikov, 2005; Chai & Jacobs, 2010; Ishikawa & Montello, 2006; Wen, Ishikawa, & Sato, 2011). These differences, however, are poorly understood and can be difficult to assess except by self-report methods. VEs offer an opportunity to collect objective data in environments that can be controlled and standardized. In this study, we designed a VE consisting of buildings arrayed along 2 separated routes, allowing for differentiation of between-route and within-route representation. Performance on a pointing task and a model-building task correlated with self-reported navigation ability. However, for participants with lower levels of between-route pointing, the Santa Barbara Sense of Direction scale (Hegarty, Richardson, Montello, Lovelace, & Subbiah, 2002) did not predict individual differences in accuracy when pointing to buildings within the same route. Thus, we confirm the existence of individual differences in the ability to construct a cognitive map of an environment, identify both the strengths and the potential weaknesses of self-report measures, and isolate a dimension that may help to characterize individual differences more completely. The VE designed for diis study provides an objective behavioral measure of navigation ability that can be widely used as a research tool. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Occasionally, we lose track of our position in the world, and must re-establish where we are located in order to function. This process has been termed the ability to reorient and was first studied by Ken Cheng in 1986. Reorientation research has revealed some powerful cross-species commonalities. It has also engaged the question of human uniqueness because it has been claimed that human adults reorient differently from other species, or from young human children, in a fashion grounded in the distinctive combinatorial power of human language. In this chapter, we consider the phenomenon of reorientation in comparative perspective, both to evaluate specific claims regarding commonalities and differences in spatial navigation, and also to illustrate, more generally, how comparative cognition research and research in human cognitive development have deep mutual relevance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Proportional judgments in continuous formats engage children's spatial reasoning. • Proportional judgments on collections of discrete objects are less spatial and harder. • Discretized continuous formats are intermediate in difficulty. • Children's fraction knowledge tracks the continuous to discrete progression. • Suggests that teaching should follow the continuous-discretized-discrete progression. Proportional judgments are easier for children in continuous formats rather than discretized ones (e.g., liquid in a beaker vs. in a beaker with unit markings). Continuous formats tap a basic sense of approximation magnitude, whereas discretized formats evoke erroneous counting strategies. On this account, truly discrete formats with separated objects should be even harder. This study (N = 565 7- to 12-year-old children) investigated that prediction. It also examined whether the format effects vary with children's fraction knowledge (FK; part–whole relations, computation, and fraction number line estimation). As found previously, discretized formats were more challenging than continuous ones; as predicted, discrete formats were yet harder. The format effect interacted with FK. Low-FK children were above chance only with continuous formats, medium-FK children struggled with discrete formats only, and high-FK children did well with all three formats. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]