Cognitive Processing

, Volume 16, Supplement 1, pp 323–326 | Cite as

Sex differences and errors in the use of terrain slope for navigation

  • Daniele Nardi
  • Corinne A. Holmes
  • Nora S. Newcombe
  • Steven M. Weisberg
Short Report

Abstract

Unlike most of the spatial cues that have received attention, a sloping terrain can be perceived by multimodal sensory inputs (vision, balance, and kinesthesia), making it potentially very salient for navigation. Furthermore, a homogeneous slope can be used like a compass to identify directions (e.g., uphill, downhill, and sideways), but not to determine distances. We briefly review recent evidence on navigation with slope, emphasizing two main findings. On the one hand, we focus on the conspicuous sex difference found in the ability to localize a target in a square, tilted enclosure; this has emerged in human adults and children, and we suggest that it is related to lower awareness of the slope for females. On the other hand, we describe the general pattern of errors that arises when localizing the target during the task; these errors indicate the use of a bi-coordinate representation of the slope. Limitations and ideas for future studies are proposed.

Keywords

Navigation Reorientation Slope Sex differences Spatial representation 

References

  1. Chai XJ, Jacobs LF (2009) Sex differences in directional cue use in a virtual landscape. Behav Neurosci 123:276–283CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Chai XJ, Jacobs LF (2010) Effects of cue types on sex differences in human spatial memory. Behav Brain Res 208:336–342CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Cheng K, Huttenlocher J, Newcombe NS (2013) 25 years of research on the use of geometry in spatial reorientation: a current theoretical perspective. Psychon Bull Rev 20:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Franklin N, Tversky B (1990) Searching imagined environments. J Exp Psychol Gen 119:63–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hirtle SC, Jonides J (1985) Evidence of hierarchies in cognitive maps. Memory Cogn 13:208–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Holmes CA, Nardi D, Newcombe NS, Weisberg SM (2015) Children’s use of slope to guide navigation: sex differences relate to spontaneous slope perception. Spat Cogn Comput. doi: 10.1080/13875868.2015.1015131 Google Scholar
  7. Hu Q, Zhang J, Wu D, Shao Y (2015) Is height a core geometric cue for navigation? Young children’s use of height in reorientation. J Exp Child Psychol 130:123–131CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Jacobs LF, Schenk F (2003) Unpacking the cognitive map: the parallel map theory of hippocampal function. Psychol Rev 110:285–315CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Jeffery KJ, Jovalekic A, Verriotis M, Hayman R (2013) Navigating in a three-dimensional world. Behav Brain Sci 36(05):523–543CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Kelly JW (2011) Head for the hills: the influence of environmental slant on spatial memory organization. Psychon Bull Rev 18:774–780CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Lawton CA (2010) Gender, spatial abilities, and wayfinding. In: Chrisler JC, McCreary DR (eds) Handbook of gender research in psychology. Springer, New York, pp 317–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. McNamara TP, Hardy JK, Hirtle SC (1989) Subjective hierarchies in spatial memory. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 15:211CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Nardi D, Bingman VP (2009) Pigeon (Columba livia) encoding of a goal location: the relative importance of shape geometry and slope information. J Comp Psychol 123:204–216CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Nardi D, Nitsch KP, Bingman VP (2010) Slope-driven goal location behavior in pigeons. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 36:430–442CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Nardi D, Newcombe NS, Shipley TF (2011) The world is not flat: can people reorient using slope? J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 37:354–367CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Nardi D, Newcombe NS, Shipley TF (2013) Reorienting with terrain slope and landmarks. Memory Cogn 41:214–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nardi D, Meloni R, Orlandi M, Olivetti-Belardinelli M (2014) Where is uphill? Sex differences reorienting on a sloped environment presented through 2D images. Perception 43:249–264CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. O’Laughlin EM, Brubaker BS (1998) Use of landmarks in cognitive mapping: gender differences in self report versus performance. Personal Individ Differ 24:595–601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Restat JD, Steck SD, Mochnatzki HF, Mallot HA (2004) Geographical slant facilitates navigation and orientation in virtual environments. Perception 33:667–687CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Voyer D, Voyer S, Bryden MP (1995) Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: a meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. Psychol Bull 117:250–270CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Weisberg SM, Newcombe NS (2014) A slippery directional slope: individual differences in using slope as a directional cue. Memory Cogn 42:648–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Weisberg SM, Nardi D, Newcombe NS, Shipley TF (2014) Up by upwest: is slope like north? Q J Exp Psychol 67:1959–1976CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Marta Olivetti Belardinelli and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniele Nardi
    • 1
  • Corinne A. Holmes
    • 2
  • Nora S. Newcombe
    • 2
  • Steven M. Weisberg
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyEastern Illinois UniversityCharlestonUSA
  2. 2.Temple UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA
  3. 3.University of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations