Memory & Cognition

, Volume 42, Issue 4, pp 648–661 | Cite as

A slippery directional slope: Individual differences in using slope as a directional cue

Article

Abstract

Navigators rely on many different types of cues to build representations of large-scale spaces. Sloped terrain is an important cue that has received recent attention in comparative and human spatial research. However, the studies to date have been unable to determine how directional slope information leads to more accurate spatial representations. Moreover, whereas some studies have shown that the inclusion of slope cues improves performance on spatial tasks across participants (Kelly, 2011; Restat, Steck, Mochnatzki, & Mallot, 2004), other research has suggested individual differences in the benefits of slope cues (Chai & Jacobs, 2010; Nardi, Newcombe, & Shipley, 2011). We sought to clarify the role of sloped terrain in improving the representation of large-scale environments. In Experiment 1, participants learned the layout of buildings in one of two desktop virtual environments: either a directionally sloped terrain or a completely flat one. Participants in the sloped environment outperformed those in the flat environment. However, participants used slope information as an additional cue, rather than as a preferred reference direction. In Experiment 2, the two virtual environments were again either flat or sloped, but we increased the complexity of the relations between the slope and the path. In this experiment, better performance in the sloped environment was only seen for participants with good self-reported senses of direction. Taken together, the studies show that slope provides useful information for building environmental representations in simple cases, but that individual differences emerge in more complex situations. We suggest that good and bad navigators use different navigational strategies.

Keywords

Individual differences Spatial navigation Slope Slant Virtual environments 

Notes

Author note

Work on this project was funded by a grant to the Spatial Intelligence and Learning Center from the National Science Foundation, Grant Nos. SBE-0541957 and SBE-1041707. We thank Edward Brakoniecki for his contribution to this work.

References

  1. Baumann, O., Chan, E., & Mattingley, J. B. (2010). Dissociable neural circuits for encoding and retrieval of object locations during active navigation in humans. NeuroImage, 49, 2816–2825. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.10.021 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chai, X. J., & Jacobs, L. F. (2010). Effects of cue types on sex differences in human spatial memory. Behavioural Brain Research, 208, 336–342. doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2009.11.039 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Epstein, R. A., Higgins, J. S., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2005). Learning places from views: Variation in scene processing as a function of experience and navigational ability. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 73–83. doi:10.1162/0898929052879987 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Friedman, A., & Kohler, B. (2003). Bidimensional regression: Assessing the configural similarity and accuracy of cognitive maps and other two-dimensional data sets. Psychological Methods, 8, 468–491. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.8.4.468 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2007). Action video game experience alters the spatial resolution of vision. Psychological Science, 18, 88–94. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01853.x PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Grön, G., Wunderlich, A. P., Spitzer, M., Tomczak, R., & Riepe, M. W. (2000). Brain activation during human navigation: gender-different neural networks as substrate of performance. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 404–408.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hegarty, M., Richardson, A. E., Montello, D. R., Lovelace, K., & Subbiah, I. (2002). Development of a self-report measure of environmental spatial ability. Intelligence, 30, 425–447. doi:10.1016/S0160-2896(02)00116-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hegarty, M., & Waller, D. (2004). A dissociation between mental rotation and perspective-taking spatial abilities. Intelligence, 32, 175–191. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2003.12.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kelly, J. W. (2011). Head for the hills: The influence of environmental slant on spatial memory organization. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 774–780. doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0100-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kelly, J. W., Beall, A. C., Loomis, J. M., Smith, R. S., & Macuga, K. L. (2006). Simultaneous measurement of steering performance and perceived heading on a curving path. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception, 3, 83–94. doi:10.1145/1141897.1141898 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kozhevnikov, M., & Hegarty, M. (2001). A dissociation between object manipulation spatial ability and spatial orientation ability. Memory & Cognition, 29, 745–756. doi:10.3758/BF03200477 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lappe, M., Stiels, M., Frenz, H., & Loomis, J. M. (2011). Keeping track of the distance from home by leaky integration along veering paths. Experimental Brain Research, 212, 81–89. doi:10.1007/s00221-011-2696-x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lawton, C. A. (2010). Gender, spatial abilities, and wayfinding. In J. C. Chrisler & D. R. McCreary (Eds.), Handbook of gender research in psychology (pp. 317–342). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Miniaci, M. C., Scotto, P., & Bures, J. (1999). Place navigation in rats guided by a vestibular and kinesthetic orienting gradient. Behavioural Neuroscience, 113, 1115–1126. doi:10.1037/0735-7044.113.6.1115 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mou, W., McNamara, T. P., & Zhang, L. (2013). Global frames of reference organize configural knowledge of paths. Cognition, 129, 180–193. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2013.06.015 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nardi, D., Newcombe, N. S., & Shipley, T. F. (2011). The world is not flat: Can people reorient using slope? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 354–367. doi:10.1037/a0021614 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Nardi, D., Newcombe, N. S., & Shipley, T. F. (2012). Reorientating with terrain slope and landmarks. Memory & Cognition, 41, 214–228. doi:10.3758/s13421-012-0254-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nardi, D., Nitsch, K. P., & Bingman, V. P. (2010). Slope-driven goal location behavior in pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 36, 430–442. doi:10.1037/a0019234 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1956). The child’s conception of space. New York, NY: Norton. Original work published 1948.Google Scholar
  20. Restat, J. D., Steck, S. D., Mochnatzki, H. F., & Mallot, H. A. (2004). Geographical slant facilitates navigation and orientation in virtual environments. Perception, 33, 667–687. doi:10.1068/p5030 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sandstrom, N. J., Kaufman, J., & Huettel, S. A. (1998). Males and females use different distal cues in a virtual environment navigation task. Cognitive Brain Research, 6, 351–360. doi:10.1016/S0926-6410(98)00002-0 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Saucier, D. M., Green, S. M., Leason, J., MacFadden, A., Bell, S., & Elias, L. J. (2002). Are sex differences in navigation caused by sexually dimorphic strategies or by differences in the ability to use the strategies? Behavioral Neuroscience, 116, 403–410. doi:10.1037/0735-7044.116.3.403 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Tobler, W. R. (1994). Bidemensional regression. Geographical Analysis, 26, 187–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Weisberg, S. M., & Newcombe, N. S. (2013). Are all types of vertical information created equal? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 568–569. doi:10.1017/S0140525X13000599 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wen, W., Ishikawa, T., & Sato, T. (2011). Working memory in spatial knowledge acquisition: Differences in encoding processes and sense of direction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 654–662. doi:10.1002/acp.1737 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wolbers, T., & Hegarty, M. (2010). What determine our navigational abilities? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14, 138–146. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2010.01.001 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyTemple UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations