Encyclopedia of Animal Cognition and Behavior

Living Edition
| Editors: Jennifer Vonk, Todd Shackelford

Rodentia Navigation

  • Victoria D. ChamizoEmail author
  • Teresa Rodrigo
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47829-6_804-1
  • 27 Downloads

Synonyms

Definition

Rodentia navigation refers to how rodents find their way about (i.e., to find food or water, or to return home), to the many strategies and mechanisms underlying spatially guided behavior. Rodents have a varied range of strategies, some innate and others learned, that help them to navigate, and when faced with a specific spatial task, the one they choose will depend both on their sensorial capacities and on the nature of the stimuli that are available (for reviews see Rodrigo 2002; Tommasi et al. 2012).

Background

Rodents can use different navigational strategies to locate a goal. Moreover, they can use a given strategy in a specific situation and under different conditions, use another one. The ability to find their way round their world is seen as of critical adaptive significance. Rodents can navigate using information based on conspecifics (social influences), on their own movement (i.e., dead...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Bisbing, T., Sayde, J. M., Saxon, M., & Brown, M. F. (2015). Factors modulating social influence on spatial choice in rats. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 41, 286–300.Google Scholar
  2. Brown, M. F. (2011). Social influences on rat spatial choice. Comparative Cognition and Behavior Reviews, 6, 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chamizo, V. D. (2003). Acquisition of knowledge about spatial location: Assessing the generality of the mechanism of learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56B, 107–119.Google Scholar
  4. Cheng, K. (1986). A purely geometric module in the rat’s spatial representation. Cognition, 23(2), 149–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cheng, K., & Spetch, M. L. (1998). Mechanisms of landmark use in mamals and birds. In S. Healy (Ed.), Spatial representation in animals (pp. 1–17). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Cheung, A., Stürzl, W. S., Zeil, J., & Cheng, K. (2008). The information content of panoramic images II: View-based navigation in nonrectangular experimental arenas. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 34, 15–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Collett, T. S., Cartwright, B. A., & Smith, B. A. (1986). Landmark learning and visuo-spatial memories in gerbils. Journal of Comparative Physiology, 158A, 835–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Doeller, C. F., & Burgess, N. (2008). Distinct error-correcting and incidental learning of location relative to landmarks and boundaries. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105, 5909–5914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Galef, B. G., Jr. (1988). Communication of information concerning distant diets in a social, central-place foraging species (Rattus norvegicus). In T. R. Zentall & B. G. Galef Jr. (Eds.), Social learning: Psychological and biological perspectives (pp. 119–140). Hillsdale: L. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Gallistel, C. R. (1990). The organization of learning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  11. Gilroy, K. E., & Pearce, J. M. (2014). The role of local, distal, and global information in latent spatial learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cognition, 40, 212–224.Google Scholar
  12. Greene, C. M., & Cook, R. G. (1997). Landmark geometry and identity controls spatial navigation in rats. Animal Learning and Behavior, 25, 312–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hull, C. L. (1943). Principles of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  14. Kosaki, Y., Austen, J. M., & McGregor, A. (2013). Overshadowing of geometry learning by discrete landmarks in the water maze: Effects of relative salience and relative validity of competing cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behaviour Processes, 39, 126–139.Google Scholar
  15. Leising, K. J., & Blaisdell, A. P. (2009). Associative basis of landmark learning and integration in vertebrates. Comparative Cognition and Behavior Reviews, 4, 80–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mackintosh, N. J. (1983). Conditioning and associative learning. Oxford: Claredon Press.Google Scholar
  17. Mackintosh, N. J. (2002). Do not ask whether they have a cognitive map, but how they find their way about. Psicológica, 23, 165–185.Google Scholar
  18. Mesa, V., Osorio, A., Ballesta, S., Marimon, J. M., & Chamizo, V. D. (2017). Geometric vs. non-geometric information: Explaining male rats’ selective preferences in a navigation task. Learning and Motivation, 60, 23–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Miller, N. Y., & Shettleworth, S. J. (2007). Learning about environmental geometry: An associative model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 33, 191–212.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Mittelstaedt, H., & Mittelstaedt, M.-L. (1982). Homing by path integration. In F. Papi & H. G. Wallraff (Eds.), Avian navigation (pp. 290–297). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Morris, R. G. M. (1981). Spatial localization does not require the presence of local cues. Learning and Motivation, 12, 239–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. O'Keefe, J., & Nadel, L. (1978). The hippocampus as a cognitive map. Oxford: Claredon Press.Google Scholar
  23. Pearce, J. M. (2009). An associative analysis of spatial learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1665–1684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Roberts, W. A., Cruz, C., & Tremblay, J. (2007). Rats take correct novel routes and shortcuts in an enclosed maze. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 33(2), 79–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Rodrigo, T. (2002). Navigational strategies and models. Psicológica, 23, 3–32.Google Scholar
  26. Rodríguez, C. A., Torres, A. A., Mackintosh, N. J., & Chamizo, V. D. (2010). Sex differences in the strategies used by rats to solve a navigation task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 36, 395–401.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Rodríguez, C. A., Chamizo, V. D., & Mackintosh, N. J. (2011). Overshadowing and blocking between landmark learning and shape learning: The importance of sex differences. Learning & Behavior, 39, 324–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tolman, E. C. (1948). Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review, 55, 189–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tommasi, L., Chiandetti, C., Pecchia, T., Sovrano, V. A., & Vallortigara, G. (2012). From natural geometry to spatial cognition. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 36, 799–824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Williams, C. L., Barnett, A. M., & Meck, W. H. (1990). Organizational effects of early gonadal secretions on sexual differentiation in spatial memory. Behavioral Neuroscience, 104, 84–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Cognition, Development and Educational Psychology, Institute of NeurosciencesUniversitat de BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.CCiTUB, Animal Research Unit of PsychologyUniversitat de BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain

Section editors and affiliations

  • Kenneth Leising
    • 1
  1. 1.Texas Christian UniversityForth WorthUSA