Skip to main content

Persistent and stable biases in spatial learning mechanisms predict navigational style

Abstract

A wealth of evidence in rodents and humans supports the central roles of two learning systems—hippocampal place learning and striatal response learning—in the formation of spatial representations to support navigation. Individual differences in the ways that these mechanisms are engaged during initial encoding and subsequent navigation may provide a powerful framework for explaining the wide range of variability found in the strategies and solutions that make up human navigational styles. Previous work has revealed that activation in the hippocampal and striatal networks during learning could predict navigational style. Here, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate the relative activations in these systems during both initial encoding and the act of dynamic navigation in a learned environment. Participants learned a virtual environment and were tested on subsequent navigation to targets within the environment. We observed that a given individual had a consistent balance of memory system engagement across both initial encoding and subsequent navigation, a balance that successfully predicted the participants’ tendencies to use novel shortcuts versus familiar paths during dynamic navigation. This was further supported by the observation that the activation during subsequent retrieval was not dependent on the type of solution used on a given trial. Taken together, our results suggest a model in which the place- and response-learning systems are present in parallel to support a variety of navigational behaviors, but stable biases in the engagement of these systems influence what solutions might be available for any given individual.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Notes

  1. It is important to note that the hippocampus and caudate are used here as markers for what are certain to be larger networks that support these behaviors.

  2. All of the analyses were also conducted using only the completed trials. The pattern of results did not change, so all classifiable trials were used in order to maintain power for the analysis of the brain data.

  3. We repeated the ANOVA with Hemisphere as a factor, with identical results and no effects or interactions with hemisphere, ps > .20.

References

  • Avants, B. B., Epstein, C. L., Grossman, M., & Gee, J. C. (2008). Symmetric diffeomorphic image registration with cross-correlation: Evaluating automated labeling of elderly and neurodegenerative brain. Medical Image Analysis, 12, 26–41. doi:10.1016/j.media.2007.06.004

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brett, M., Anton, J.-L., Valabregue, R., & Poline, J.-B. (2002). Region of interest analysis using the MarsBar toolbox for SPM 99. NeuroImage, 16, S497.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denis, M., Pazzaglia, F., Cornoldi, C., & Bertolo, L. (1999). Spatial discourse and navigation: An analysis of route directions in the city of Venice. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 145–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fields, A. W., & Shelton, A. L. (2006). Individual skill differences and large-scale environmental learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 506–515. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.32.3.506

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Garden, S., Cornoldi, S., & Logie, R. H. (2002). Visuo-spatial working memory in navigation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 35–50.

    Article  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.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  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. Journal of Neuroscience, 23, 5945–5952.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Iglói, K., Doeller, C. F., Berthoz, A., Rondi-Reig, L., & Burgess, N. (2010). Lateralized human hippocampal activity predicts navigation based on sequence or place memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 14466–14471. doi:10.1073/pnas.1004243107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Insausti, R., Juottonen, K., Soininen, H., Insausti, A. M., Partanen, K., Vainio, P., & Pitkänen, A. (1998). MR volumetric analysis of the human entorhinal, perirhinal, and temporopolar cortices. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 19, 659–671.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kirwan, C. B., & Stark, C. E. L. (2007). Overcoming interference: An fMRI investigation of pattern separation in the medial temporal lobe. Learning and Memory, 14, 625–633. doi:10.1101/lm.663507

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacy, J. W., Yassa, M. A., Stark, S. M., Muftuler, L. T., & Stark, C. E. L. (2010). Distinct pattern separation related transfer functions in human CA3/dentate and CA1 revealed using high-resolution fMRI and variable mnemonic similarity. Learning and Memory, 18, 15–18. doi:10.1101/lm.1971111

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawton, C. A. (1994). Gender differences in way-finding strategies: Relationship to spatial ability and spatial anxiety. Sex Roles, 30, 765–779.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maguire, E. A., Burgess, N., Donnett, J. G., Frackowiak, R. S. J., Frith, C. D., & O’Keefe, J. (1998). Knowing where and getting there: A human navigation network. Science, 280, 921–924. doi:10.1126/science.280.5365.921

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. Journal of Neuroscience, 31, 15264–15268. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3634-11.2011

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazaika, P. K., Hoeft, F., Glover, G. H., & Reiss, A. L. (2009). Methods and software for fMRI analysis for clinical subjects. CA San Francisco: Poster session presented at the Meeting of Human Brain Mapping.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meneghetti, C., Pazzaglia, F., & De Beni, R. (2011). Spatial mental representations derived from survey and route descriptions: When individuals prefer extrinsic frame of reference. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 150–157. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2010.12.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nieto-Castanon, A., Ghosh, S. S., Tourville, J. A., & Guenther, F. H. (2003). Region of interest based analysis of functional imaging data. NeuroImage, 19, 1303–1316.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Packard, M. G. (1999). Glutamate infused posttraining into the hippocampus or caudate–putamen differentially strengthens place and response learning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 96, 12881–12886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Packard, M. G., & Knowlton, B. J. (2002). Learning and memory functions of the basal ganglia. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 25, 563–593.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Packard, M. G., & McGaugh, J. L. (1996). Inactivation of hippocampus or caudate nucleus with lidocaine differentially affects expression of place and response learning. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 65, 65–72.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pazzaglia, F., & De Beni, R. (2001). Strategies of processing spatial information in survey and landmark-centred individuals. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 13, 493–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poldrack, R. A., Clark, J., Paré-Blagoev, E. J., Shohamy, D., Creso Moyano, J., Myers, C., & Gluck, M. A. (2001). Interactive memory systems in the human brain. Nature, 414, 546–550. doi:10.1038/35107080

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reber, P. J., Knowlton, B. J., & Squire, L. R. (1996). Dissociable properties of memory systems: Differences in the flexibility of declarative and nondeclarative knowledge. Behavioral Neuroscience, 110, 861–871. doi:10.1037/0735-7044.110.5.861

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Restle, F. (1957). Discrimination of cues in mazes: A resolution of the “place-vs.-response” question. Psychological Review, 64, 217–228. doi:10.1037/h0040678

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitzer-Torbert, N. (2007). Place and response learning in human virtual navigation: Behavioral measures and gender differences. Behavioral Neuroscience, 121, 277–290. doi:10.1037/0735-7044.121.2.277

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shelton, A. L., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2002). Neural correlates of encoding space from route and survey perspectives. Journal of Neuroscience, 22, 2711–2717.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shelton, A. L., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2004). Neural correlates of individual differences in spatial learning strategies. Neuropsychology, 18, 442–449. doi:10.1037/0894-4105.18.3.442

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shelton, A. L., Marchette, S. A., & Furman, A. J. (2013). A mechanistic approach to individual differences in spatial learning, memory, and navigation. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 59, pp. 223–259). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Squire, L. R. (2004). Memory systems of the brain: A brief history and current perspective. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 82, 171–177. doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2004.06.005

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talairach, J., & Tournoux, P. (1988). Co-planar stereotaxic atlas of the human brain: 3-dimensional proportional system. An approach to cerebral imaging. New York, NY: Thieme Medical.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolman, E. C. (1948). Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review, 55, 189–208. doi:10.1037/h0061626

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolman, E. C., Ritchie, B. F., & Kalish, D. (1946). Studies in spatial learning: II. Place learning versus response learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36, 221–229. doi:10.1037/h0060262

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandenberg, S. G., & Kuse, A. R. (1978). Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47, 599–604.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, B. D. (2000). Simultaneous inference for fMRI data. Retrieved from http://afni.nimh.nih.gov/afni/doc/manual/AlphaSim

  • Yassa, M. A., & Stark, C. E. (2009). A quantitative evaluation of cross-participant registration techniques for MRI studies of the medial temporal lobe. NeuroImage, 44, 319–327. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.09.016

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zacks, J. M., & Michelon, P. (2005). Transformations of visuospatial images. Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews, 4, 96–118. doi:10.1177/1534582305281085

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author note

This work was supported by NSF Cog Neuro Grant No. 0920221 to A.L.S.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amy L. Shelton.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Figure S1

Correlation results of the normed ratio of hippocampal/caudate activation broken down by solution type during subsequent navigation. (A) Correlation between the normed ratio (NR) during shortcut trials and the solution index (SI) for ROIs derived from initial encoding (IE); (B) Correlation between NR during shortcut trials and SI for ROIs derived from subsequent navigation (SN); (C) Correlation between NR during familiar path trials and SI for IE ROIs; (D) Correlation between NR during familiar path trials and SI for SN ROIs; (E) Correlation between NR for shortcut and familiar path trials computed from IE ROIs; and (F) Correlation between NR for shortcut and familiar path trials computed from SN ROIs. (PDF 185 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Furman, A.J., Clements-Stephens, A.M., Marchette, S.A. et al. Persistent and stable biases in spatial learning mechanisms predict navigational style. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 14, 1375–1391 (2014). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-014-0279-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-014-0279-6

Keywords

  • Navigation
  • Place and response learning
  • Hippocampus
  • Striatum
  • Caudate
  • Functional neuroimaging
  • Individual differences