Alignment Effects and Allocentric-Headings within a Relative Heading Task

  • Heather Burte
  • Mary Hegarty
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8684)

Abstract

Human navigational abilities likely depend on the accuracy of coding one’s location and facing direction, either real or imagined. The ability to compare one’s current facing direction to a photograph’s facing direction was assessed using the Allocentric-Heading Recall task (Sholl et al., 2006). The angular difference between the facing directions (or allocentric-headings) produced an alignment effect, such that trials were easiest when the facing directions were aligned but hardest when contra-aligned. In the present study, a Relative Heading task was used to determine if the original alignment effect was due to the comparison of allocentric-headings or was due to interference from sensorimotor cues. To accomplish this, participants compared text or photographed headings and responded with a directional button-press. Failure to replicate the alignment effect suggested that inference from sensorimotor cues contributed to the original effect. Thus, directional comparisons are impacted by an individual’s location and heading within an environment.

Keywords

Spatial cognition alignment effect allocentric-heading 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Kelly, J.W., Avraamides, M.N., Loomis, J.M.: Sensorimotor alignment effects in the learning environment and in novel environments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 33, 1092–1107 (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Klatzky, R.L.: Allocentric and egocentric spatial representations: Definitions, distinctions, and interconnections. In: Freksa, C., Habel, C., Wender, K.F. (eds.) Spatial Cognition 1998. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1404, pp. 1–17. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sholl, M.J., Kenny, R.J., DellaPorta, K.A.: Allocentric-heading recall and its relation to self-reported sense-of-direction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 32, 516–533 (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burte, H., Hegarty, M.: Revisiting the relationship between allocentric-heading recall and self-reported sense-of-direction. In: Miyake, N., Peebles, D., Cooper, R.P. (eds.) Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 162–167. Cognitive Science Society (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ranck Jr., J.B.: Head-direction cells in the deep cell layers of dorsal presubiculum in freely moving rats. Society of Neuroscience Abstracts 10, 599 (1984)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shelton, A.L., Mcnamara, T.P.: Multiple views of spatial memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 4, 102–106 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shelton, A.L., McNamara, T.P.: Systems of spatial reference in human memory. Cognitive Psychology 43, 274–310 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mou, W., McNamara, T.P.: Intrinsic frames of reference in spatial memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 28, 162–170 (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    McNamara, T.P.: How are the locations of objects in the environment represented in memory? In: Freksa, C., Brauer, W., Habel, C., Wender, K.F. (eds.) Spatial Cognition III. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2685, pp. 174–191. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mou, W., Zhao, M., McNamara, T.P.: Layout geometry in the selection of intrinsic frames of reference from multiple viewpoints. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 33, 145–154 (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Waller, D., Montello, D.R., Richardson, A.E., Hegarty, M.: Orientation specificity and spatial updating of memories for layouts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 28, 1051–1063 (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    May, M.: Imaginal perspective switches in remembered environments: Transformation versus interference accounts. Cognitive Psychology 48, 163–206 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mou, W., McNamara, T.P., Valiquette, C.M., Rump, B.: Allocentric and egocentric updating of spatial memories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 30, 142–157 (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mou, W., Liu, X., McNamara, T.P.: Layout geometry in encoding and retrieval of spatial memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human perception and performance 35, 83–93 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Burte, H., Hegarty, M.: Individual and strategy differences in an allocentric-heading recall task. In: Knauff, M., Pauen, M., Sebanz, N., Wachsmuth, I. (eds.) Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 1958–1963. Cognitive Science Society (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hegarty, M., Richardson, A.E., Montello, D.R., Lovelace, K., Subbiah, I.: Development of a self-report measure of environmental spatial ability. Intelligence 30, 425–447 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Franklin, N., Tversky, B.: Searching imagined environments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 119, 63–76 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heather Burte
    • 1
  • Mary Hegarty
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Psychological & Brain SciencesUniversity of CaliforniaSanta BarbaraUSA

Personalised recommendations