Constraints on priming in spatial memory: Naturally learned versus experimentally learned environments

Abstract

In four experiments, we explored constraints on priming in spatial memory. In Experiments 1 and 2, subjects who were familiar with the locations of buildings on the Vanderbilt campus participated in a recognition test. The subjects' task was to decide whether or not named buildings were on the campus. Foils in this recognition test were realistic but fictional names of buildings. In principle, the subjects could have performed this task without using spatial knowledge; in fact, they must not have used spatial knowledge, because there was no evidence of priming in recognition as a function of the spatial relations between buildings on the campus. This result differs from those obtained in earlier experiments that have examined memory of spatial layouts learned in laboratory settings. In Experiment 3, the fictional foils were replaced by names of buildings in an area of the campus separated geographically from the main campus. Evidently, this change induced subjects to retrieve spatial knowledge, because the spatial priming effect materialized. A fourth experiment replicated the above findings in a single experiment and demonstrated that spatial priming could be obtained when the configuration of buildings was learned experimentally. These results are explained by appealing to the "decontextualization" that takes place in memory over time.

Determinants of spatial priming in environmental memory

“…If this is correct, the inferences drawn from these studies regarding the organization and structure of environmental memory must be reexamined. Indirect evidence for our interpretation comes from several recent studies in whichit has been shownthat spatial priming does not occur in naturally learned environments (e.g., college campuses or city layouts) unless the task requires a spatialdecision (Clayton& Chattin, 1989;McNamara, Altarriba, et al, 1989), or unless spatial proximity coincides with functional relatedness (Merrill & Baird, 1987). We suggest that this is because learning everyday environments typically involves varied movement patternsand multiple start/destination pairingsof locations that reduce the coincidence betweentemporaland spatial proximity.…”

“…In Experiment 2, we compared recognitionpriming in two groups of subjects who differed in how they learned the same experimental layout. One group learnedthe configuration in a manner similar to that in the study/test method used in previous studies (e.g., McNamara, Altarriba, et al, 1989). The other learned the layout by the same trip trial methodthat was used in Experiment 1.…”

“…In particular, McNamara, Altarriba, et al (1989) have suggested that the reason recognition leads to spatial priming in experimentalbut not natural situations is that whenenvironments are learned in an experimental setting, the identities and locations of objects are experienced only in the same spatial context. Decisions about an object's being a member of the environmental array' 'must be based on these highly contextualized and necessarily spatial experiences (p.…”

“…For example, the recognition of an object as a member of an environmental array is faciliPortions of this research were presented to the American Psychological Society Convention held in Dallas on June 10, 1990. Requests for reprints should besent to Richard C. Sherman,Department of Psychology,Miami University,Oxford,OH 45056. tated if the immediately preceding object is close to the current target in terms of Euclidean or functional distance (McNamara, 1986;McNamara, Altarriba, Bendele, Johnson, & Clayton, 1989;McNamara, Ratcliff, & McKoon, 1984), or if it is from the same subregion of the environment (McNamara, 1986;McNamara, Hardy, & Hirtle, 1989;Sherman, 1987). Since a recognition task does not explicitly require retrieval or manipulation of spatial information, these priming effects seem to offer strong evidence that the representation of encoded identities of objects in the environment is spatially organized.…”

“…In all previous studies that have yielded recognition priming effects, researchers have used experimentally learned configurations (i.e., novel maps or layouts of objects in an experimental space), in which encoding and rehearsal contiguity may have coincided with spatial proximity. 1 A typical procedure (see, e.g., McNamara, 1986;McNamara, Altarriba, et al, 1989) has been to allow subjects to study the experimental configuration for a brief period and then test their knowledge of object locations, repeating the study/test sequence until some accuracy criterion is reached. Although…”