Abstract
Previous work has demonstrated superior spatial updating performance during imagined viewer rotation versus imagined object/array rotation. Studies have also suggested that rotations are more difficult to process than translations. In three studies, we examined whether the advantage seen for updating during imagined self-rotations would generalize to translations. The participants updated the positions of objects in a line extending either to the front and back of the viewer or to the right and left after imagining viewer or array translation. Experiments 1 and 2 replicated the effects seen in imagined rotation tasks. A response time and accuracy advantage was found for imagined viewer translation versus imagined array translation. In Experiment 3, we directly compared real and imagined self- and array translations and demonstrated an advantage for real versus imagined array translation. The results suggest that the advantage for imagined viewer transformations is not a function of the specific transformation, but rather of the ability to imagine and predict the outcome of a moving frame of reference.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amorim, M., &Stucchi, N. (1997). Viewer- and object-centered mental explorations of an imagined environment are not equivalent.Cognitive Brain Research,5, 229–239.
Behrmann, M., &Moscovitch, M. (1994). Object-centered neglect in patients with unilateral neglect: Effects of left-right coordinates of objects.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,6, 1–16.
Bertamini, M., &Proffitt, D. R. (2000). Hierarchical motion organization in random dot configurations.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 582–593.
Bryant, D. J. (1993). Frames of reference in the spatial representation system.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,16, 241–265.
Bryant, D. J., Tversky, B., &Franklin, N. (1992). Internal and external spatial frameworks for representing described scenes.Journal of Memory & Language,31, 74–98.
Carpenter, M., &Proffitt, D. R. (2001). Comparing viewer and array mental rotations in different planes.Memory & Cognition,29, 441–448.
Chance, S., Gaunet, F., Beall, A., &Loomis, J. (1998). Locomotion mode affects the updating of objects encountered during travel: The contribution of vestibular and proprioceptive inputs to path integration.Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments,7, 168–178.
Colby, C. L., &Goldberg, M. E. (1999). Space and attention in parietal cortex.Annual Review of Neuroscience,22, 319–349.
Cooper, L. A., &Shepard, R. N. (1973). The time required to prepare for a rotated stimulus.Memory & Cognition,1, 246–250.
Creem, S. H., Wraga, M., &Proffitt, D. R. (2001). Imagining physically impossible transformations: Geometry is more important than gravity.Cognition,81, 41–61.
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, 438–500.
Franklin, N., &Tversky, B. (1990). Searching imagined environments.Journal of Experimental Psychology,119, 63–76.
Klatzky, R. L., Loomis, J., Beall, A., Chance, S., &Golledge, R. G. (1998). Updating an egocentric spatial representation during real, imagined, and virtual locomotion.Psychological Science,9, 293–298.
Levelt, W. (1984). Some perceptual limitations on talking about space. In A. J. van Doorn, W. A. van der Grind, & J. J. Koenderink (Eds.),Limits in perception (pp. 323–358). Utrecht: VNU Science Press.
May, M., &Klatzky, R. L. (2000). Path integration while ignoring irrelevant movement.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,26, 169–186.
McCloskey, M. (2001). Spatial representation in mind and brain. In B. Rapp (Ed.),The handbook of cognitive neuropsychology: What deficits reveal about the human mind (pp. 101–132). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
McCloskey, M., &Rapp, B. (2000). Attention-referenced visual representations: Evidence from impaired visual localization.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 917–933.
Presson, C. C. (1982). Strategies in spatial reasoning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,8, 243–251.
Presson, C. C., &Montello, D. R. (1994). Updating after rotational and translational body movements: Coordinate structure of perspective space.Perception,23, 1447–1455.
Price, C. M., &Gilden, D. L. (2000). Representations of motion and direction.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 18–30.
Redlick, F. P., Jenkin, M., &Harris, L. R. (2001). Humans can use optic flow to estimate distance of travel.Vision Research,41, 213–219.
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.
Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Inferences through imagined actions: Knowing by simulated doing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,25, 116–136.
Schwartz, D. L., &Holton, D. L. (2000). Tool use and the effect of action on the imagination.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,26, 1655–1665.
Shepard, R. N., &Metzler, J. (1971). Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects.Science,171, 701–703.
Talmy, L. (1983). How language structures space. In H. L. Pick & L. P. Acredolo (Eds.),Spatial orientation: Theory, research, and application (pp. 225–282). New York: Plenum.
Tversky, B., Kim, J., &Cohen, A. (1999). Mental models of spatial relations and transformations from language. In G. Rickheit & C. Habel (Eds.),Mental models in discourse processing and reasoning (pp. 239–258). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Wang, R. F., &Simons, D. J. (1999). Active and passive scene recognition across views.Cognition,70, 191–210.
Wraga, M., Creem, S.H., &Proffitt, D.R. (2000a). Perception-action dissociations of a walkable Müller-Lyer configuration.Psychological Science,11, 239–243.
Wraga, M., Creem, S. H., &Proffitt, D. R. (2000b). Updating displays after imagined object and viewer rotations.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,26, 151–168.
Wraga, M., Creem, S. H., & Proffitt, D. R. (in press). Spatial updating of virtual displays during self- and display rotation.Memory & Cognition.
Zacks, J., Mires, J., Tversky, B., &Hazeltine, E. (2002). Mental spatial transformations of objects and perspective.Spatial Cognition & Computation,2, 315–322.
Zacks, J., Rypma, B., Gabrieli, J.D. E., Tversky, B., &Glover, G.H. (1999). Imagined transformations of bodies: An fMRI investigation.Neuropsychologia,37, 1029–1040.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Creem-regehr, S.H. Updating space during imagined self- and array translations. Memory & Cognition 31, 941–952 (2003). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196447
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196447