Advertisement

Animal Cognition

, 9:207 | Cite as

Evidence against integration of spatial maps in humans

  • Bradley R. SturzEmail author
  • Kent D. Bodily
  • Jeffrey S. Katz
Original Article

Abstract

A dynamic 3-D virtual environment was constructed for humans as an open-field analogue of Blaisdell and Cook's (2005) pigeon foraging task to determine if humans, like pigeons, were capable of integrating separate spatial maps. Participants used keyboard keys and a mouse to search for a hidden goal in a 4×4 grid of raised cups. During Phase 1 training, a goal was consistently located between two landmarks (Map 1: blue T and red L). During Phase 2 training, a goal was consistently located down and left of a single landmark (Map 2: blue T). Transfer trials were then conducted in which participants were required to make choices in the presence of the red L alone. Cup choices during transfer assessed participants’ strategies: association (from Map 1), generalization (from Map 2), or integration (combining Map 1 and 2). During transfer, cup choices increased to a location which suggested an integration strategy and was consistent with results obtained with pigeons. However, additional analyses of the human data suggested participants initially used a generalization strategy followed by a progressive shift in search behavior away from the red L. This shift in search behavior during transfer was responsible for the changes in cup choices across transfer trials and was confirmed by a control condition. These new analyses offer an alternative explanation to the spatial integration account proposed for pigeons.

Keywords

Virtual Environment Human Spatial Cognitive Map Integration 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by grant NSF IBN-0316133 to Jeffrey S. Katz. This research was conducted following the relevant ethical guidelines for human research. The authors would like to thank Ken Cheng and three anonymous reviewers for comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. The authors would also like to thank J. Keeley and A. A. Lazarte for statistical advice and Emily Gray for information regarding the creation of the spatial distribution plots.

Supplementary material

References

  1. Arthur EJ, Hancock PA, Chrylser ST (1997) The perception of spatial layout in real and virtual worlds. Ergonomics 40:69–77PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bennett AT (1993) Spatial memory in a food storing corvid: I. Near tall landmarks are primarily used. J Comp Physiol A 173:193–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bennett AT (1996) Do animals have cognitive maps? J Exp Biol 199:219–224PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Blaisdell AP, Cook RG (2005) Integration of spatial maps in pigeons. Anim Cogn 8:7–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chamizo VD, Aznar-Casanova JA, Artigas AA (2003) Human overshadowing in a virtual pool: simple guidance is a good competitor against local learning. Learn Motiv 34:262–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chapuis N, Varlet C (1987) Shortcuts by dogs in natural surroundings. Q J Exp Psychol 39B:49–64Google Scholar
  7. Cheng K (1988) Some psychophysics of the pigeon's use of landmarks. J Comp Physiol A 159:69–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cheng K (1989) The vector sum model of pigeon landmark use. J Exp Psychol Anim B 15:366–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cheng K (1995) Landmark-based spatial memory in the pigeon. In: Medin D (ed), The psychology of learning and motivation. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 1–21Google Scholar
  10. Cheng K, Collett TS, Pickhard A, Wehner R (1987) The use of visual landmarks by honeybees: bees weight landmarks according to their distance from the goal. J Comp Physiol A 161:469–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cheng K, Spetch ML (1995) Stimulus control in the use of landmarks by pigeons in a touch-screen task. J Exp Anal Behav 63:187–201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cheng K, Spetch ML (1998) Mechanisms of landmark use in mammals and birds. In: Healy S (ed) Spatial representation in animals. Oxford University Press, Oxford, England, pp 1–17Google Scholar
  13. Cheng K, Spetch ML, Kelly DM, Bingman VP (2006) Small-scale spatial cognition in pigeons. Behav Process 72:115–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cramer AE, Gallistel CR (1997) Vervet monkeys as traveling salesmen. Nature 387:464PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dyer FC (1991) Bees acquire route-based memories but not cognitive maps in a familiar landscape. Anim Behav 41:239–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Foo P, Warren WH, Duchon A, Tarr MJ (2005) Do humans integrate routes into a cognitive map? Map- versus landmark-based navigation of novel shortcuts. J Exp Psychol Learn 31:195–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gallistell CR (1990) The organization of learning. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  18. Gallistell CR, Cramer AE (1996) Computations on metric maps in mammals: getting oriented and choosing a multi-destination route. J Exp Biol 199:211–217Google Scholar
  19. Gibson BM (2001) Cognitive maps not used by humans during a dynamic navigational task. J Comp Psychol 115:397–402PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Gibson BM, Kamil AC (2001) Tests for cognitive mapping in Clark's nutcrackers. J Comp Psychol 115:403–417PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gould JL (1986) The locale map of honey bees: do insects have cognitive maps? Science 232:861–863PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hartley T, King JA, Burgess N (2003) Studies of the neural basis of human navigation and memory. In: Jeffery K (ed), The neurobiology of spatial behavior. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 144–164Google Scholar
  23. Jacobs WJ, Laurance HE, Thomas KGF (1997) Place learning in virtual space I: acquisition, overshadowing, and transfer. Learn Motiv 28:521–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Keith JR, McVety KM (1988) Latent place learning in a novel environment and the influence of prior training in rats. Psychobiology 16:146–151Google Scholar
  25. Kelly DM, Bischof WF (2005) Reorienting in images of a three-dimensional environment. J Exp Psychol Human 31:1391–1403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kelly DM, Spetch ML (2004a) Reorientation in a two-dimensional environment: I. Do adults encode the featural and geometric properties of a two-dimensional schematic of a room? J Comp Psychol 118:82–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kelly DM, Spetch ML (2004b) Reorientation in a two-dimensional environment: II. Do pigeons encode the featural and geometric properties of a two-dimensional schematic of a room? J Comp Psychol 118:384–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lechelt DP, Spetch ML (1997) Pigeons’ use of landmarks for spatial search in a laboratory arena and in digitized images of the arena. Learn Motiv 28:424–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Leonard B, McNaughton BL (1990) Spatial representation in the rat: conceptual, behavioral, and neurophysiological perspectives. In: Kesner RP, Olton DS (eds) Neurobiology of comparative cognition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 363–422Google Scholar
  30. Loomis JM, Blascovich JJ, Beall AC (1999) Immersive virtual environment technology as a basic research tool in psychology. Behav Res Meth Ins C 31:557–564Google Scholar
  31. MacDonald SE, Spetch ML, Kelly DM, Cheng K (2004) Strategies in landmark use by children, adults, and marmoset monkeys. Learn Motiv 35:322–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Menzel EW (1973) Chimpanzee spatial memory organization. Science 182:943–945PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Menzel EW (1978) Cognitive mapping in chimpanzees. In: Hulse SH, Fowler H, Honig WK (eds) Cognitive processes in animal behavior. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJGoogle Scholar
  34. Montello DR, Hegarty M, Richardson AE, Waller D (2004) Spatial memory of real environments, virtual environments, and maps. In: Allen GL (ed) Human spatial memory. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp 251–285Google Scholar
  35. O’Keefe J, Nadel L (1978) The hippocampus as a cognitive map. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  36. Olton DS (1979). Mazes, maps, and memory. Am Psychol 34:583–596PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Olton DS, Collision C, Werz MA (1977a) Spatial memory and radial arm maze performance of rats. Learn Motiv 8:289–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Olton DS, Samuelson RJ (1976) Remembrance of places passed: spatial memory in rats. J Exp Psychol Anim B 2:97–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Olton DS, Walker JA, Gage FH, Johnson CT (1977b) Choice behavior of rats searching for food. Learn Motiv 8:315–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Péruch P, Gaunet F (1998) Virtual environments as a promising tool for investigating human spatial cognition. Cah Psychol Cogn 17:881–899Google Scholar
  41. Plowright CMS, Shettleworth SJ (1990) The role of shifting in choice behavior of pigeons on a two-armed bandit. Behav Process 21:157–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Real LA (1991) Animal choice behavior and the evolution of cognitive architecture. Science 253:980–986PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rodrigo T, Chamizo VD, McLaren IP, Mackintosh NJ (1997) Blocking in the spatial domain. J Exp Psychol Anim B 23:110–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shettleworth SJ (1988) Foraging as operant behavior and operant behavior as foraging: what have we learned? In: Bower GH (ed) The psychology of learning and motivation: advances in research and theory, vol. 22. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp 1–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shettleworth SJ (1998) Cognition, evolution, and behavior. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  46. Spetch ML (1995) Overshadowing in landmark learning: touch-screen studies with pigeons and humans. J Exp Psychol Anim B 21:166–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Spetch ML, Cheng K, MacDonald SE (1996) Learning the configurations of a landmark array: I. Touch-screen studies with pigeons and humans. J Comp Psychol 110:55–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Spetch ML, Cheng K, MacDonald SE, Linkenhoker BA, Kelly DM, Dooerkson S (1997) Learning the configurations of a landmark array in pigeons and humans: II. Generality across search tasks. J Comp Psychol 111:14–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Spetch ML, Cheng K, Mondloch MV (1992) Landmark use by pigeons in a touch-screen spatial search task. Anim Learn Behav 20:281–292Google Scholar
  50. Spetch ML, Kelly DM, Lechelt DP (1998) Encoding of spatial information in images of an outdoor scene by pigeons and humans. Anim Learn Behav 26:85–102Google Scholar
  51. Spetch ML, Mondloch MV (1993) Control of pigeons’ spatial search by graphic landmarks in a touch-screen task. J Exp Psychol Anim B 19:353–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Spetch ML, Wilkie DM (1994) Pigeons’ use of landmarks presented in digitized images. Learn Motiv 25:245–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Stanney KM (ed) (2002) Handbook of virtual environments: design, implementation, and applications. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJGoogle Scholar
  54. Thinus-Blanc C (1988) Animal spatial cognition. In: Weiskrantz L (ed) Thought without language. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 371–395Google Scholar
  55. Tolman EC (1948) Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychol Rev 55:189–208CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Waller D, Loomis JM, Golledge RG, Beall AC (2000) Place learning in humans: the role of distance and direction information. Spat Cogn Comput 2:333–354Google Scholar
  57. Wang RF, Spelke ES (2002) Human spatial representation: insights from animals. Trends Cogn Sci 6:376–382PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wehner R, Menzel R (1990) Do insects have cognitive maps? Annu Rev Neurosci 13:403–414PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Wehner R, Srinivasan MV (1981) Searching behaviour of desert ants, genus Cataglyphis (Formicidae, Hymenoptera). J Comop Physiol A 142:315–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bradley R. Sturz
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kent D. Bodily
    • 1
  • Jeffrey S. Katz
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Psychology, 226 Thach HallAuburn UniversityAuburnUSA

Personalised recommendations