The Role of Temporal Order in Egocentric and Allocentric Spatial Representations

Abstract

Several studies have shown that spatial information is encoded using two types of reference systems: egocentric (body-based) and/or allocentric (environment-based). However, most studies have been conducted in static situations, neglecting the fact that when we explore the environment, the objects closest to us are also those we encounter first, while those we encounter later are usually those closest to other environmental objects/elements. In this study, participants were shown with two stimuli on a computer screen, each depicting a different geometric object, placed at different distances from them and an external reference (i.e., a bar). The crucial manipulation was that the stimuli were shown sequentially. After participants had memorized the position of both stimuli, they had to indicate which object appeared closest to them (egocentric judgment) or which object appeared closest to the bar (allocentric judgment). The results showed that egocentric judgements were facilitated when the object closest to them was presented first, whereas allocentric judgements were facilitated when the object closest to the bar was presented second. These results show that temporal order has a different effect on egocentric and allocentric frames of reference, presumably rooted in the embodied way in which individuals dynamically explore the environment.

The RODI mHealth app Insight: Machine Learning-Driven Identification of Digital Indicators for Neurodegenerative Disorder Detection

“…Spatial information encompasses processes and data required for determining positions and directions in one's surroundings, including fundamental spatial abilities like object location memory. Humans utilize two primary frames of reference, namely the egocentric and allocentric, to encode and organize spatial information in memory [46], [47]. Prior studies have indicated that allocentric representations operate at a slower pace compared to egocentric ones [48].…”

The RODI mHealth app Insight: Machine-Learning-Driven Identification of Digital Indicators for Neurodegenerative Disorder Detection

“…Spatial information encompasses processes and data required for determining positions and directions in one's surroundings, including fundamental spatial abilities like object location memory. Humans utilize two primary frames of reference, namely the egocentric and allocentric, to encode and organize spatial information in memory [56,57]. Prior studies have indicated that allocentric representations operate at a slower pace compared to egocentric ones [58].…”

Investigating the different domains of environmental knowledge acquired from virtual navigation and their relationship to cognitive factors and wayfinding inclinations

“…Specifically, their classification suggests that navigation ability demands: (a) knowledge about landmarks, involving the ability to recall the elements present in an environment, which can be assessed with free landmark recall or landmark recognition tasks; and (b) knowledge about their locations, as seen in observer-based mode (location-egocentric knowledge; assessed, for instance, with egocentric pointing tasks) and in environment-based mode (location-allocentric knowledge; assessed, for example, with tasks that involve allocentric pointing or positioning single landmarks on a map). The classification thus distinguishes between two frames of reference, one egocentric (landmark-to-subject relations; assessed with route direction tasks or tasks that involve arranging landmarks in order, for instance), the other allocentric (landmark-to-landmark relations; assessed with sketch map drawings or shortest path finding tasks, for example) as a large body of research on spatial memory has previously suggested (Burgess, 2006 ; Iachini et al, 2023 ; Mou et al, 2006 ; Starrett et al, 2019 , 2022 ; Starrett & Ekstrom, 2018 ; Zhang et al, 2014 ; Zhong & Kozhevnikov, 2016 ) and its development with age (Colombo et al, 2017 ; Ladyka-Wojcik & Barense, 2021 ; Ruggiero et al, 2016 ). The classification of Claessen and van der Ham ( 2017 ) also envisages the demand for: (c) knowledge about paths linking landmarks, considered both as a succession of elements encountered (path-route knowledge), and as an array of elements as seen on a map (path-survey knowledge); the classification thus also distinguishes between the survey (bird’s eye view) and route (observer’s point of view) perspectives (Taylor & Tversky, 1992 ).…”