Systems of Spatial Reference in Human Memory

Abstract

Seven experiments examined the spatial reference systems used in memory to represent the locations of objects in the environment. Participants learned the locations of common objects in a room and then made judgments of relative direction using their memories of the layout (e.g., ''Imagine you are standing at the shoe, facing the lamp; point to the clock''). The experiments manipulated the number of views that observers were allowed to experience, the presence or absence of local and global reference systems (e.g., a rectangular mat on which objects were placed and the walls of the room, respectively), and the congruence of local and global reference systems. Judgments of relative direction were more accurate for imagined headings parallel to study views than for imagined headings parallel to novel views, even with up to three study views. However, study views misaligned with salient reference systems in the environment were not strongly represented if they were experienced in the context of aligned views. Novel views aligned with a local reference system were, under certain conditions, easier to imagine than were novel views misaligned with the local reference system. We propose that learning and remembering the spatial structure of the surrounding environment involves interpreting the layout in terms of a spatial reference system. This reference system is imposed on the environment but defined by egocentric experience. © 2001 Elsevier Science Spatial reference systems are essential for the specification of location and orientation in space. The location of Nashville, for example, can be specified by describing its position with respect to the boundaries of the state (e.g., Nashville is in the middle of Tennessee), by providing coordinates of latitude The authors thank Jeffrey Schall, Kyle Cave, Jeffery Franks, and Ted Payne for various contributions to the research. We also thank the reviewers for comments on earlier drafts.

Imaginal repositioning in everyday environments: effects of testing method and setting

“…There is an increasing consensus that the extra costs of accessing knowledge after imagined perspective switches can be broken down into two separate sources: transformation costs related to switching into the to-be-imagined perspective, on the one hand, and interference costs caused by conXicts between the imagined perspective and the body-deWned perspective, on the other hand. Detailed assumptions about the underlying cognitive and neural mechanisms of both are under investigation and under debate (May, 2004a;Shelton & McNamara, 2001;Sholl & Bartels, 2002;Waller et al, 2002;Wang, 2003).…”

Peripheral vision benefits spatial learning by guiding eye movements

“…Figure 4a also shows that in both conditions, JRDs were most accurately performed when imagined headings were aligned with the learned orientation (0°). This indicates that spatial memories formed in this experiment exhibited orientation dependence, a hallmark of spatial memory for a room-sized environment (Shelton & McNamara, 2001;Yamamoto & Shelton, 2009a). This observation was supported statistically by the main effect of orientation, F(7, 70) 0 5.56, p 0 .011, η p 2 0 .36, and the planned contrast comparing JRD performance for the 0°orientation with that for other orientations (45°-315°), F(1, 11) 0 28.02, p < .001, η p 2 0 .72.…”

Modelo computacional para la generación de indicaciones en la localización de objetos en entornos virtuales : aspectos espaciales y perceptivos

“…The location of an object is inherently relative and cannot be referenced without establishing a frame of reference (Mou and McNamara, 2002;Shelton and McNamara, 2001). …”

“…On the other hand, when people learn a spatial layout, they interpret the spatial structure in terms of an intrinsic reference system, which is defined by the actual layout. Likewise, the chosen intrinsic reference in each case can be determined by the spatial or the nonspatial properties of the objects, the structure of the surrounding environment and the viewpoint of the observer (Mou and McNamara, 2002;Shelton and McNamara, 2001). …”

“…The origin of the coordinate axes for the egocentric reference frame is inside the body or mentally inside the self (Ma et al, 2012;McNamara, 2003); see Figure 2.4 (left). In the allocentric frame of reference, the object location is represented with respect to the environment and independently of the observer (Ma et al, 2012;Mou and McNamara, 2002;Shelton and McNamara, 2001). …”