Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Using a dynamic three-dimensional virtual environment task, we investigated the influence of overtraining of feature and geometric cues on preferential spatial cue use. We trained two groups of human participants to respond to feature and geometric cues in separate enclosures before placing these cues in conflict on a critical test trial. All participants learned to respond to rewarded features located along the principal axis of a rectangular search space and to rewarded geometric cues of a rectangular search space in separate training phases followed by a single test trial. During the test trial, we situated the rewarded features in the unrewarded geometric corners and the unrewarded features in rewarded geometric corners. For one group, participants were overtrained with feature cues compared to geometric cues before experiencing the conflict test; whereas, for another group, participants were overtrained with geometric cues compared to feature cues before experiencing the conflict test. Although both groups learned to respond to both feature and geometric cues at an equivalent rate and to an equivalent level of terminal accuracy, testing results revealed no difference between the groups with respect to their preference for feature or geometric cues. Despite a lack of influence of overtraining on spatial cue preference, participants showed an overall preference for feature cues. We discuss the results with respect to implications for theoretical accounts of spatial learning.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Alyan, S., & Jander, R. (1994). Short-range homing in the house mouse, Mus musculus: Stages in the learning of directions. Animal Behaviour, 48, 285–298. CrossRef
Chamizo, V. D. (2003). Acquisition of knowledge about spatial location: Assessing the generality of the mechanism of learning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56B, 102–113. CrossRef
Cheng, K., & Newcombe, N. S. (2005). Is there a geometric module for spatial orientation? Squaring theory and evidence. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 1–23. CrossRef
Collett, T. S., & Zeil, J. (1998). Places and landmarks: an arthropod perspective. In S. Healy (Ed.), Spatial Representation in Animals (pp. 18–53). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Doeller, C. F., & Burgess, N. (2008). Distinct error-correcting and incidental learning location relative to landmarks and boundaries. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 5909–5914. CrossRef
Doeller, C. F., King, J. A., & Burgess, N. (2008). Parallel striatal and hippocampal systems for landmarks and boundaries in spatial memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 5915–5920. CrossRef
Etienne, A. S., Berlie, J., Georgakopoulos, J., & Maurer, R. (1998). Role of dead reckoning in navigation. In S. Healy (Ed.), Spatial representation in animals (pp. 54–68). New York: Oxford.
Gallistel, C. R. (1990). The organization of learning. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Lee, S. A., & Spelke, E. S. (2010). Two systems of spatial representation underlying navigation. Experimental Brain Research, 206, 179–188. CrossRef
Lee, S. A., & Spelke, E. S. (2011). Young children reorient by computing layout geometry, not by matching images of the environment. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 192–198. CrossRef
Mishkin, M., Underleider, L. G., & Macko, K. A. (1983). Object vision and spatial vision: two cortical pathways. Trends in Neurosciences, 6, 414–417. CrossRef
Sturz, B. R., & Bodily, K. D. (2011). Is surface-based orientation influenced by a proportional relationship of shape parameters? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 848–854. CrossRef
Teroni, E., Portenier, V., & Etienne, A. S. (1987). Spatial orientation of the golden hamster in condition of conflicting location-based and route-based information. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 20, 389–397. CrossRef
- Overtraining and the use of feature and geometric cues for reorientation
Bradley R. Sturz
Katherine A. Gaskin
Kent D. Bodily