Are allocentric spatial reference frames compatible with theories of Enactivism?
Theories of Enactivism propose an action-oriented approach to understand human cognition. So far, however, empirical evidence supporting these theories has been sparse. Here, we investigate whether spatial navigation based on allocentric reference frames that are independent of the observer’s physical body can be understood within an action-oriented approach. Therefore, we performed three experiments testing the knowledge of the absolute orientation of houses and streets towards north, the relative orientation of two houses and two streets, respectively, and the location of houses towards each other in a pointing task. Our results demonstrate that under time pressure, the relative orientation of two houses can be retrieved more accurately than the absolute orientation of single houses. With infinite time for cognitive reasoning, the performance of the task using house stimuli increased greatly for the absolute orientation and surpassed the slightly improved performance in the relative orientation task. In contrast, with streets as stimuli participants performed under time pressure better in the absolute orientation task. Overall, pointing from one house to another house yielded the best performance. This suggests, first, that orientation and location information about houses are primarily coded in house-to-house relations, whereas cardinal information is deduced via cognitive reasoning. Second, orientation information for streets is preferentially coded in absolute orientations. Thus, our results suggest that spatial information about house and street orientation is coded differently and that house orientation and location is primarily learned in an action-oriented way, which is in line with an enactive framework for human cognition.
- Burte, H., & Hegarty, M. (2012). Revisiting the Relationship between Allocentric-Heading Recall and Self-Reported Sense of Direction. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 162–167).Google Scholar
- Gibson, J. J. (1977). Perceiving (pp. 67–82). Acting and Knowing: Toward an ecological psychology. the theory of affordances.Google Scholar
- Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Theory of Affordances. In The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception (pp. 127–143).Google Scholar
- Haith, M. M., & Benson, J. B. A. (1998). Infant Cognition. In D. Kuhn & R. Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (5th edition) volume 2: Cognition, perception, and language. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Ishikawa, T., & Montello, D. R. (2006). Spatial knowledge acquisition from direct experience in the environment: Individual differences in the development of metric knowledge and the integration of separately learned places. Cognitive Psychology, 52(2), 93–129. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2005.08.003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Klatzky, R. (1998). Allocentric and egocentric spatial representations: Definitions, distinctions, and interconnections. In Spatial cognition - An interdisciplinary approach to representation and processing of spatial knowledge (pp. 1–17). doi:10.1007/3-540-69342-4 (September 1997).
- Loomis, J. M., Klatzky, R. L., Golledge, R. G., Cicinelli, J. G., Pellegrino, J. W., & Fry, P. A. (1993). Nonvisual navigation by blind and sighted: assessment of path integration ability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(1), 73–91. doi:10.1037/0096-34126.96.36.199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Maye, A., & Engel, A. K. (2012). Time scales of sensorimotor contingencies. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (vol. 7366 LNAI, pp. 240–249). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-31561-9_27.
- McNamara, T. P. (2002). How are the Locations of Objects in the Environment Represented in Memory? In C. Freksa, W. Brauer, C. Habel, & K. F. Wender (Eds.), Spatial Cognition III: Routes and Navigation, Human Memory and Learning, Spatial Representation and Spatial Learning (pp. 174–191). Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/3-540-45004-1_11.
- McNamara, T. P., Sluzenski, J., & Rump, B. (2008). 2.11-Human Spatial Memory and Navigation. doi:10.1016/b078-012370509-9.00176-5.
- Meilinger, T. (2008a). The network of reference frames theory: a synthesis of graphs and cognitive maps. In Spatial Cognition VI. Learning, Reasoning, and Talking (pp. 344–360). http://www.springerlink.com/index/y22uq32mg0347887.
- Meilinger, T. (2008b). Strategies of orientation in environmental spaces. biological cybernetics. Tübingen: MPI for Biological Cybernetics.Google Scholar
- Meilinger, T., Riecke, B. E., & Bülthoff, H. H. (2014). Local and global reference frames for environmental spaces. Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 67(3), 1–28. doi:10.1080/17470218.2013.821145.
- Noë, A. (2004). Action in perception. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1967). The child’s conception of space. New York: FJ Langdon & JL Lunzer, Trans.Google Scholar
- Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 9(4), 625–36. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12613670.
- Woolley, D. G., Vermaercke, B., de Beeck, H. O., Wagemans, J., Gantois, I., D’Hooge, R., et al. (2010). Sex differences in human virtual water maze performance: Novel measures reveal the relative contribution of directional responding and spatial knowledge. Behavioural Brain Research, 208(2), 408–414.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar