Abstract
In three experiments, we examined the effects of locomotion and incidental learning on the formation of spatial memories. Participants learned the locations of objects in a room and then made judgments of relative direction, using their memories (e.g., “Imagine you are standing at the clock, facing the jar. Point to the book”). The experiments manipulated the number of headings experienced, the amount of interaction with the objects, and whether the participants were informed that their memories of the layout would be tested. When participants were required to maintain a constant body orientation during learning (Experiment 1), they represented the layout in terms of a single reference direction parallel to that orientation. When they were allowed to move freely in the room (Experiment 2), they seemed to use two orthogonal reference axes aligned with the walls of the enclosing room. Extensive movement under incidental learning conditions (Experiment 3) yielded a mixture of these two encoding strategies across participants. There was no evidence that locomotion, interaction with objects, or incidental learning led to the formation of spatial memories that differed from those formed from static viewing.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Biederman, I., &Gerhardstein, P. C. (1993). Recognizing depth rotated objects: Evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 1162–1182.
Bülthoff, H. H., Edelman, S. Y., &Tarr, M. J. (1995). How are three-dimensional objects represented in the brain?Cerebral Cortex,5, 247–260.
Cherney, I. D., &Ryalls, B. O. (1999). Gender-linked differences in the incidental memory of children and adults.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,72, 305–328.
Christou, C. G., &Bülthoff, H. H. (1999). View dependence in scene recognition after active learning.Memory & Cognition,27, 996–1007.
Collett, T. S., &Baron, J. (1994). Biological compasses and the coordinate frame of landmark memories in honeybees.Nature,368, 137–140.
Diwadkar, V. A., &McNamara, T. P. (1997). Viewpoint dependence in scene recognition.Psychological Science,8, 302–307.
Easton, R. D., &Sholl, M. J. (1995). Object-array structure, frames of reference, and retrieval of spatial knowledge.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 483–500.
Kirk, R. E. (1995).Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Klatzky, R. L. (1998). Allocentric and egocentric spatial representations: Definitions, distinctions, and interconnections. In C. Freksa, C. Habel, & K. F. Wender (Eds.),Spatial cognition: An interdisciplinary approach to representing and processing spatial knowledge (pp. 1–17). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Levine, M., Jankovic, I., &Palij, M. (1982). Principles of spatial problem solving.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,111, 157–175.
McNamara, T. P., Rump, B., & Werner, S. (in press). Egocentric and geocentric frames of reference in memory of large-scale space.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.
Mou, W., &McNamara, T. P. (2002). Intrinsic frames of reference in spatial memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,28, 162–170.
Presson, C. C., &Montello, D. R. (1994). Updating after rotational and translational body movements: Coordinate structure of perspective space.Perception,23, 1447–1455.
Richardson, A. E., Montello, D. R., &Hegarty, M. (1999). Spatial knowledge acquisition from maps and from navigation in real and virtual environments.Memory & Cognition,27, 741–750.
Rieser, J. J. (1989). Access to knowledge of spatial structure at novel points of observation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15, 1157–1165.
Rieser, J. J., Guth, D. A., &Hill, E. W. (1986). Sensitivity to perspective structure while walking without vision.Perception,15, 173–188.
Rock, I. (1973).Orientation and form. New York: Academic Press.
Roskos-Ewoldsen, B., McNamara, T. P., Shelton, A. L., &Carr, W. S. (1998). Mental representations of large and small spatial layouts are orientation dependent.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,24, 215–226.
Shelton, A. L., &McNamara, T. P. (1997). Multiple views of spatial memory.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,4, 102–106.
Shelton, A. L., &McNamara, T. P. (2001a). Systems of spatial reference in human memory.Cognitive Psychology,43, 274–310.
Shelton, A. L., &McNamara, T. P. (2001b). Visual memories from nonvisual experiences.Psychological Science,12, 343–347.
Sholl, M. J., &Bartels, G. P. (2002). The role of self to object updating in orientation-free performance on spatial-memory tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,28, 422–436.
Sholl, M. J., &Nolin, T. L. (997). Orientation specificity in representations of place.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,23, 1494–1507.
Simons, D. J., &Wang, R. F. (1998). Perceiving real-world viewpoint changes.Psychological Science,9, 315–320.
Tversky, B. (981). Distortions in memory for maps.Cognitive Psychology,13, 407–433.
Waller, D., Montello, D. R., Richardson, A. E., &Hegarty, M. (2002). Orientation specificity and spatial updating of memories for layouts.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,28, 1051–1063.
Werner, S., &Schmidt, K. (1999). Environmental reference systems for large scale spaces.Spatial Cognition & Computation,1, 447–473.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Preparation of this manuscript and the research reported in it were supported in part by NIMH Grant R01-MH57868. This article was improved as a result of the comments of two anonymous reviewers.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Valiquette, C.M., McNamara, T.P. & Smith, K. Locomotion, incidental learning, and the selection. Memory & Cognition 31, 479–489 (2003). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194405
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194405