Developmental changes in the effects of landmarks on infant spatial behavior.

Abstract

The ability of 6-, 9-, and 11-month-olds to keep track of positions in space was assessed under four conditions varying the presence, salience, and location of landmark information. Each infant was trained to expect an event at one of two windows to either side. The infants were than rotated to the opposite side of the room, and the direction of search was interpreted as an indication of whether the event's location was being coded egocentrically or objectively. The results indicated high proportions of egocentricity at all ages in the absence of landmarks. In contrast, egocentricity decreased at all ages when stripes and lights surrounded the target site. However, whereas the 9-and 11-montholds switched to consistent objective responding in this condition, the 6-montholds glanced at both windows, indicating uncertainty as to which reference system should be used. Finally, only the 11-month-olds showed any evidence of being able to use landmark information presented at the irrelevant window.

The development of path integration: Combining estimations of distance and heading

“…Explorations of the mechanisms that support it have provided insight into, for example, the development of spatial orientation in infancy (e.g. Bremner, Hatton, Foster, & Mason, 2011;Acredolo & Evans, 1980) and this literature has been complemented by very useful reviews of the relationship between vision, locomotion, and spatial orientation in childhood, as provided by Campos et al (2000) and Rieser & Pick (2007). More recently, a study by Nardini, Jones, Bedford, & Braddick (2008) has explored how information from path integration is combined with visual cues in order to support place memory.…”

Systems of Spatial Reference in Human Memory

“…Acredolo (1978Acredolo ( , 1979Acredolo & Evans, 1980), in particular, examined how children use egocentric and environmental reference systems. In a series of studies, she trained children to make a particular response relative to both an egocentric and an environmental reference system.…”

“…Acredolo (1978) found that very young children made egocentric responses, but between 6 and 16 months of age children began using the environmental information, turning to the landmark (window). Additional experiments suggested that the use of such information was facilitated when landmarks were made more salient (Acredolo & Evans, 1980) or when children were placed in familiar environments (Acredolo, 1979).…”

Object Permanence After a 24-Hr Delay and Leaving the Locale of Disappearance: The Role of Memory, Space, and Identity.

“…The earliest form of externally referenced location coding is cue learning (e.g., the color or pattern of the screen that occluded the object); this is effective enough for 9-month-olds to search correctly when they have been moved after watching an object hidden under distinctive screens (Bremner, 1978b). With development, spatial coding begins to take into account landmarks in the environment (Acredolo & Evans, 1980;DeLoache & Brown, 1983), that is, perceptually distinctive, fixed elements of the locale. Because an object's location can now be coded relative to landmarks, this affords accurate search after movement even when the object is hidden by identical occluders or in an unmarked location (Newcombe, Huttenlocher, Drummey, & Wiley, 1998).…”