Active Versus Passive Processing of Spatial Information in a Computer-Simulated Environment

Wilson, Paul N.; Foreman, Nigel; Gillett, Raphael; Stanton, Danaë

doi:10.1207/s15326969eco0903_3

Cited by 68 publications

(92 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, we can identify five distinct components of active exploration that potentially contribute to spatial knowledge: (1) efferent motor commands that determine the path of locomotion, (2) reafferent proprioceptive and vestibular information for self-motion (1 and 2 are collectively referred to as idiothetic information; Mittelstaedt & Mittelstaedt, 2001), (3) allocation of attention to navigation-related features of the environment, (4) cognitive decisions about the direction of travel or the route, and (5) mental manipulation of spatial information. These components may be grouped into those that involve physical activity (motor control and reafferent information) and those that involve cognitive activity (attention, decision making, and mental manipulation) (Wilson, Foreman, Gillett, & Stanton, 1997). For present purposes, we will refer to navigation that involves any or all of these five components as active.…”

Section: Components Of Active Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To address some of these problems, Wilson et al (1997) conducted an experiment with five groups in a yoked design, using desktop VR with a keyboard (where "active" denoted decision making). The active-with-movement group both made decisions about their path and controlled the movement by pressing the keyboard, whereas the passive-without-movement group simply viewed the corresponding display.…”

Section: Motor Control and Decision Making In Desktop Vrmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Active and passive contributions to spatial learning

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It seems intuitively obvious that active exploration of a new environment will lead to better spatial learning than will passive exposure. However, the literature on this issue is decidedly mixed-in part, because the concept itself is not well defined. We identify five potential components of active spatial learning and review the evidence regarding their role in the acquisition of landmark, route, and survey knowledge. We find that (1) idiothetic information in walking contributes to metric survey knowledge, (2) there is little evidence as yet that decision making during exploration contributes to route or survey knowledge, (3) attention to place-action associations and relevant spatial relations contributes to route and survey knowledge, although landmarks and boundaries appear to be learned without effort, (4) route and survey information are differentially encoded in subunits of working memory, and (5) there is preliminary evidence that mental manipulation of such properties facilitates spatial learning. Idiothetic information appears to be necessary to reveal the influence of attention and, possibly, decision making in survey learning, which may explain the mixed results in desktop virtual reality. Thus, there is indeed an active advantage in spatial learning, which manifests itself in the task-dependent acquisition of route and survey knowledge.

show abstract

Section: Components Of Active Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Motor Control and Decision Making In Desktop Vrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Active and passive contributions to spatial learning

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1997;Peruch, Vercher, & Gauthier, 1995;Regian, Shebilske, & Monk, 1992;Richardson, Montello, & Hegarty, 1999;Rossano & Moak, 1998;Wilson, Foreman, Gillett, & Stanton, 1997;Witmer, Bailey, & Knerr, 1996). Much ofthe appeal ofVET is the ease with which one can create complex environments for participants to explore.…”

Section: Spatial Cognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cognitive mapping, the acquisition of environmental knowledge, is another topic ideally suited for IVE technology (see, e.g., Rossano & Moak, 1998;Wilson et al, 1997;Witmer et al, 1996). Besides making this research much easier, IVE technology also allows manipulations that would be impossible in the real world.…”

Section: Spatial Cognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Immersive virtual environment technology as a basic research tool in psychology

Loomis

Blascovich

Beall

1999

Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers

578

354

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Immersive virtual environment (IVE) technology has great promise as a tool for basic experimental research in psychology. IVE technology gives participants the experience of being surrounded by the computer-synthesized environment. We begin with a discussion of the various devices needed to implement immersive virtual environments, including object manipulation and social interaction. We review the benefits and drawbacks associated with virtual environment technology, in comparison with more conventional ways of doing basic experimental research. We then consider a variety of examples of research using IVE technology in the areas of perception, spatial cognition, and social interaction.

show abstract

“…In this work, the authors agree that various factors can enhance this spatial transfer. One question not yet resolved concerns the exploration mode used to navigate in a VE [22]. Indeed, sometimes authors have shown great spatial acquisition with an active exploration mode (i.e., user had a sensorimotor interaction with the VE) compared to a passive mode exploration [23] (i.e., user had no interaction with the VE) [21][1][2] [8], but others did not [22][23] [24].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Impact of Automatic vs. Controlled Rotations on Spatial Transfer with a Joystick and a Walking Interface in VR

Larrue

Sauzéon

Foloppe

et al. 2013

Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. We present a user study assessing spatial transfer in a 3D navigation task, with two different motor activities: a minimal (joystick) and an extensive motor activity (walking Interface), with rotations of the viewpoint either controlled by the user, or automatically managed by the system. The task consisted in learning a virtual path of a 3D model of a real city, with either one of these four conditions: Joystick / Treadmill Vs Manual Rotation / Automatic Rotation. We assessed spatial knowledge with six spatial restitution tasks. To assess the interfaces used, we analyzed also the interaction data acquired during the learning path. Our results show that the direct control of rotations has different effects, depending on the motor activity required by the input modality. The quality of spatial representation increases with the Treadmill when rotations are enabled. With the Joystick, controlling the rotations affect spatial representations. We discuss our findings in terms of cognitive, sensorimotor processes and human computer interaction issues.

show abstract

Active Versus Passive Processing of Spatial Information in a Computer-Simulated Environment

Cited by 68 publications

References 22 publications

Active and passive contributions to spatial learning

Active and passive contributions to spatial learning

Immersive virtual environment technology as a basic research tool in psychology

Assessing the Impact of Automatic vs. Controlled Rotations on Spatial Transfer with a Joystick and a Walking Interface in VR

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About