Exploration patterns shape cognitive map learning

Abstract

Spontaneous, volitional spatial exploration is crucial for building up a cognitive map of the environment. However, decades of research have primarily measured the fidelity of cognitive maps after discrete, controlled learning episodes. We know little about how cognitive maps are formed during naturalistic free exploration. Here, we investigated whether exploration trajectories predicted cognitive map accuracy, and how these patterns were shaped by environmental structure. In two experiments, participants freely explored a previously unfamiliar virtual environment. We related their exploration trajectories to a measure of how long they spent in areas with high global environmental connectivity (integration, as assessed by space syntax). In both experiments, we found that participants who spent more time on paths that offered opportunities for integration formed more accurate cognitive maps. Interestingly, we found no support for our pre-registered hypothesis that self-reported trait differences in navigation ability would mediate this relationship. Our findings suggest that exploration patterns predict cognitive map accuracy, even for people who self-report low ability, and highlight the importance of considering both environmental structure and individual variability in formal theory- and model-building.

Humans account for cognitive costs when finding shortcuts: An information-theoretic analysis of navigation

“…These can be as simple as choosing to follow the usual route we have taken before, or as complex as devising a novel route through a vast array of possible paths to reach a novel goal, i.e., wayfinding. Recent experiments are increasingly shedding light on the variety of navigational strategies that we use to find our way in real-world settings [1][2][3] and virtual environments [4][5][6][7][8][9], as well as their neural underpinnings [10,11]. However, an integrative computational perspective is still missing.…”

Curiosity shapes spatial exploration and cognitive map formation in humans

“…To test this, we developed a virtual reality paradigm, in which participants could indicate their curiosity to explore several novel naturalistic environments (pre-room curiosity), as well as their subsequent interest in these environments (post-room interest). The active range covered by either the participants' path or head movements in these rooms was then indexed using roaming entropy (Brunec et al, 2022;Freund et al, 2013;Heller et al, 2020). The results revealed a double dissociation, whereby pre-room curiosity about a novel environment was associated with spatial exploration (measured via path roaming entropy), whereas the actual interestingness of a room (rated after visiting the room) was associated with visual exploration (measured via head-direction roaming entropy).…”

“…In rodents, for example, active exploration produces stronger hippocampal place cell firing (Song et al, 2005) and better coding of spatial information in place cells (Terrazas et al, 2005). In humans, higher levels of spatial exploration have been associated with more accurate cognitive maps (Brunec et al, 2022;Chrastil & Warren, 2012;Farran et al, 2022;Gagnon et al, 2016;Munion et al, 2019). Complementing these findings, by showing that spatial exploration is driven by the level of state curiosity, our results implicated an important potential role of curiosity in building cognitive maps, supporting the proposition that curiosity is a major motivator for driving information incorporation into cognitive maps (O' Keefe & Nadel, 1978).…”

“…A large literature on hippocampus-dependent navigation has shown that active exploration of novel environments is key to building cognitive maps in non-human animals and humans, which is critical for supporting efficient navigation (Bellmund et al, 2018;Brunec et al, 2022;Ekstrom et al, 2018;Epstein et al, 2017). What is less understood, however, is what cognitive and/or motivational factors drive exploration in the first placeparticularly in situations in which animals acquire spatial knowledge in the absence of any external reinforcer.…”

“…We used roaming entropy (RE) to quantify the participants' explorative behaviour in each room (Figure 1C), which has been used in prior animal and human studies to measure individual differences in exploration (Brunec et al, 2022;Freund et al, 2013;Heller et al, 2020). Roaming entropy is an index of the variability in an individual's territorial coverage, that is, how many different locations or states one visits across the entire time of exploration.…”