Distinctive Features of Spatial Perspective-Taking in the Elderly

Abstract

This study aimed to ascertain the characteristics of spatial perspective-taking ability--assumed to be a form of imaginary body movement in three-dimensional space--in the elderly. A new task was devised to evaluate the development of this function: 20 children, 20 university students, and 20 elderly people (each group comprising 10 men and 10 women) were asked to locate themselves in different vantage points. The relationship between angular deviations from the participants to the points from which perspectives were to be obtained did not differ between the elderly and university students. However, the performance of the elderly and children was inferior to that of the university students with respect to the general response time and percentage of correct responses, which indicates that imaginary body movement can be maintained in normal aging, and an apparent decline in the spatial perspective-taking ability of the elderly may arise from other cognitive information processes.

Spatial Perspective Taking is Robust in Later Life

“…This change is similar to that of executive functions (Lehto, Juujaervi, Kooistra, & Pulkkinen, 2003) or some kinds of cognitive functions (Baltes & Lindenberger, 1997). Based on these considerations, we can conclude that spatial perspective taking, particularly imagining body movement, remained relatively robust in normal aging as suggested by Watanabe (2011). To further reinforce this finding, it is important to verify the sample validity.…”

“…Response time between stimulus presentation and response from each rotation angle was termed the common response time ("RT-C"), encompassing both imagining body movement and the other cognitive processes required to solve the task; only RT-Cs at 0°represented the cognitive information processing ability aside from imagining body movement alone. When plotting such response times against rotation angles in a spatial perspective taking task, a bell-shaped graph, peaking at around 180°and with relatively straight gradients, is typically obtained (Watanabe, 2011); thus, it was expected that the time for imagining body movement increases linearly according to the increase in rotation angle in this study (Figure 3). Rotation angles that were symmetrical to the median line of the participant were at equal distances from the participant (e.g., 90°and 270°).…”

Evidence for age‐related deficits in object‐location binding during place recognition

“…Interestingly, we did not find an interaction between age and perspective shifts: while both older age groups performed worse than our younger age group, this difference did not compound with increasing perspective shifts. These findings suggest that the ability to perform perspective‐taking tasks is preserved in older age (e.g., Watanabe, ). These findings are in line with neuropsychological studies which suggest that egocentric perspective use is supported by parietal cortex activation (Postma & van der Ham, ), a brain area which is relatively resilient against functional changes resulting from age‐related structural changes when compared to the medial temporal lobe (Yamamoto, Fox, Boys, & Ord, ).…”

“…Instead, it has been argued that hippocampal-dependent topographical memories, which represent the spatial relationship between objects locations, allow for place recognition after perspective changes (Hartley et al, 2007;King, Burgess, Hartley, Vargha-Khadem, & O'Keefe, 2002). As the hippocampus undergoes functional and morphological changes already in typical aging (Klencklen, Després, & Dufour, 2012), it is not surprising that a series of studies has reported age-related deficits in perspective taking abilities (e.g., Inagaki et al, 2002;Montefinese, Sulpizio, Galati, & Committeri, 2015;Watanabe, 2011).…”

Developmental changes in the embodied self of spatial perspective taking

“…If mental self‐rotation involves rotating an embodied representation of the self, the normal immaturity of physical control in children or common decline in physical control in older adults could affect the operation of the embodied representational self. In addition, differences between age groups could easily appear in the performance of mental self‐rotation when participants undergo sensorimotor activation in an unstable physical condition, while Watanabe () and Watanabe and Takamatsu () reported no significant difference between older and younger adults when they performed an SPT task sitting deeply in a chair. In contrast, cognitive processing (other than mental self‐rotation) may not influence the level of physical control so clearly, because growth or ageing of physical control does not have a direct connection with the actual body.…”