Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The limits of boundaries: unpacking localization and cognitive mapping relative to a boundary

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Psychological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous research (Zhou, Mou, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 42(8):1316–1323, 2016) showed that learning individual locations relative to a single landmark, compared to learning relative to a boundary, led to more accurate inferences of inter-object spatial relations (cognitive mapping of multiple locations). Following our past findings, the current study investigated whether the larger number of reference points provided by a homogeneous circular boundary, as well as less accessible knowledge of direct spatial relations among the multiple reference points, would lead to less effective cognitive mapping relative to the boundary. Accordingly, we manipulated (a) the number of primary reference points (one segment drawn from a circular boundary, four such segments, vs. the complete boundary) available when participants were localizing four objects sequentially (Experiment 1) and (b) the extendedness of each of the four segments (Experiment 2). The results showed that cognitive mapping was the least accurate in the whole boundary condition. However, expanding each of the four segments did not affect the accuracy of cognitive mapping until the four were connected to form a continuous boundary. These findings indicate that when encoding locations relative to a homogeneous boundary, participants segmented the boundary into differentiated pieces and subsequently chose the most informative local part (i.e., the segment closest in distance to one location) as the primary reference point for a particular location. During this process, direct spatial relations among the reference points were likely not attended to. These findings suggest that people might encode and represent bounded space in a fragmented fashion when localizing within a homogeneous boundary.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We thank an anonymous reviewer for suggesting this alternative.

References

  • Aguire, G. K., Detre, J. A., Alsop, D. C., & D’Esposito, M. (1996). The parahippocampus subserves topographical learning in man. Cerebral Cotex, 6, 823–829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, M. C. (2003). Rethinking interference theory: Executive control and the mechanisms of forgetting. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 415–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, C., & Burgess, N. (2007). Learning in a geometric model of place cell firing. Hippocampus, 17, 786–800.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, C., Lever, C., Hayman, R., Hartley, T., Burton, S., O’Keefe, J., Jeffery, H., & Burgess, N. (2006). The boundary vector cell model of place cell firing and spatial memory. Reviews in the Neurosciences, 17(1–2), 71–97.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, A. T. D. (1996). Do animal have cognitive maps. The Journal of Experimental Biology, 199, 219–224.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bird, C. M., Capponi, C., King, J. A., Doeller, C. R., & Burgess, N. (2010). Establishing the boundaries: the hippocampal contribution to imagining scenes. The Journal of Neuroscience, 30(35), 11688–11695.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bohbot, V. D., Kaline, M., Stepankova, K., Spackova, N., Petrides, M., & Nadel, L. (1998). Spatial memory deficits in patients with lesions to the right hippocampus and to the right parahippocampal cortex. Neuropsychologia, 36(11), 1217–1238.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, N. (2008). Spatial cognition and the brain. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1124, 77–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, K. (1986). A purely geometric module in the rat’s spatial representation. Cognition, 23, 149–178.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, K., & Newcombe, N. S. (2005). Is there a geometric module for spatial orientation? Squaring theory and evidence. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(1), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Committeri, G., Galati, G., Paradis, A. L., Pizzamiglio, L., Berthoz, A., & LeBihan, D. (2004). Reference frames for spatial cognition: different brain areas are involved in viewer-, object-, and landmark-centered judgments about object location. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 1517–1535.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Doeller, C. F., & Burgess, N. (2008). Distinct error-correcting and incidental learning of location relative to landmarks and boundaries. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(15), 5909–5914.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 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 of the United States of America, 105(15), 5915–5920.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Ekstrom, A. D., Arnold, A., & Iaria, G. (2014). A critical review of the allocentric spatial representation and ist neural underpinnings: toward a network-based perspective. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 803.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Ekstrom, A. D., Kahana, M. J., Caplan, J. B., Fields, T. A., Isham, E. A., Newman, E. L., & Fried, I. (2003). Cellular networks underlying human spatial navigation. Nature, 425, 184–188.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, R. A. (2008). Parahippocampal and retrosplenial contributions to human spatial navigation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 388–396.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gouteux, S., & Spelke, E. S. (2001). Children’s use of geometry and landmarks to reorient in an open space. Cognition, 81, 119–148.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, T., Burgess, N., Lever, C., Cacucci, F., & O’Keefe, J. (2000). Modeling place fields in terms of the cortical inputs to the hippocampus. Hippocampus, 10, 369–379.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, T., Maguire, E. A., Spiers, H. J., & Burgess, N. (2003). The well-worn route and the path less traveled: Distinct neural bases of route following and wayfinding in humans. Neuron, 37, 877–888.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, T., Trinkler, I., & Burgess, N. (2004). Geometric determinants of human spatial memory. Cognition, 94(1), 39–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hermer, L., & Spelke, E. S. (1994). A geometric process for spatial reorientation in young children. Nature, 370(6484), 57–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Iaria, G., Petrides, M., Dagher, A., Pike, B., & Bohbot, V. D. (2003). Cognitive strategies dependent on the hippocampus and caudate nucleus in human navigation: Variability and change with practice. The Journal of Neuroscience, 23(13), 5945–5952.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Levine, M., Jankovic, I. N., & Palij, M. (1982). Principles of spatial problem solving. Journal of Experimental Pscyhology: General, 111(2), 157–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maguire, E. A., Frith, C. D., Burgess, N., Donnett, J. G., & O’Keefe, J. (1998a). Knowing where things are: parahippocampal involvement in encoding object locations in virtual large-scale space. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10(1), 61–76.

  • Marchette, S. A., Bakker, A., & Shelton, A. L. (2011). Cognitive mappers to creatures of habit: Differential engagement of place and response learning mechanisms predicts human navigational behavior. The Journal of Neuroscience, 31(43), 15264–15268.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, R. J., & White, N. M. (1994). Parallel information processing in the water maze: evidence for independent memory systems involving dorsal striatum and hippocampus. Behavioral Neural Biology, 61(3), 260–270.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mou, W., & Zhou, R. (2013). Defining a Boundary in Goal Localization: Infinite Number of Points or Extended Surfaces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 39(4), 1115–1127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nadel, L. (2013). Cognitive maps. In D. Waller & L. Nadel (Eds.), Handbook of spatial cognition (pp. 155–171). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • O’Keefe, J., & Dostrovsky, J. (1971). The hippocampus as a spatial map. Preliminary evidence from unit activity in the freely-moving rat. Brain Research, 34, 171–175.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • O’Keefe, J., & Nadel, L. (1978). The hippocampus as a cognitive map. Oxford University Press.

  • Tolman, E. C. (1948). Cognitive maps in rats and men. The Psychological Review, 55(4), 189–208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, H., & Ekstrom, A. D. (2013). Human neural systems underlying rigid and flexible forms of allocentric spatial representation. Human Brain Mapping, 34, 1070–1087.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, R., & Mou, W. (2016). Superior cognitive mapping through single landmark-related learning than through boundary-related learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 42(8), 1316–1323.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) to Weimin Mou.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases-Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany

    Ruojing Zhou

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Alberta, P217 Biological Sciences Bldg, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E9, Canada

    Weimin Mou

Authors
  1. Ruojing Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Weimin Mou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Ruojing Zhou or Weimin Mou.

Ethics declarations

This study was funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).

Ruojing Zhou declares that she has no conflict of interest. Weimin Mou declares that he has no conflict of interest.

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the University of Alberta.

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhou, R., Mou, W. The limits of boundaries: unpacking localization and cognitive mapping relative to a boundary. Psychological Research 82, 617–633 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-016-0839-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-016-0839-1

Search

Navigation