Inter-process relations in spatial language: Feedback and graded compatibility

Schultheis, Holger; Carlson, Lauri

doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2018.02.020

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, attempting to understand representations as combinations of structures can facilitate revealing commonalities between spatial abilities that have so far been considered only in isolation. The reference frame selection proposed in Smart is very similar to reference selection in spatial term use (Schultheis & Carlson, 2017, 2018), thus suggesting previously unanticipated commonalities between spatial term use and IPT. Third, a structure + RF view encourages to take an “across abilities” focus on investigating spatial cognition.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 62%

ASmartModel of Imaginal Perspective Taking

Schultheis

2022

Cognitive Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to judge spatial relations from perspectives that differ from one's current body orientation and location is important for many everyday activities. Despite considerable research on imaginal perspective taking, however, detailed computational accounts of the processes involved in this ability are missing. In this contribution, I introduce Smart (Spatial Memory Access by Reference Frame SelecTion) as a computational cognitive model of imaginal perspective taking processes. In assuming that imaginal perspective taking is governed by reference frame selection for memory access and subsequent motor activation, Smart is able to explain and simulate key findings on human imaginal perspective taking. In addition to providing novel insight into the mechanisms underlying imaginal perspective taking, Smart also has several implications for our view on spatial memory, more generally. In particular, Smart supports the idea that enduring spatial representations are essentially orientation‐free and that spatial representations are best viewed as flexible combinations of representation structures and reference frames.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 62%