Visually scaling distance from memory: do visible midline boundaries make a difference?

Plumert, Jodie M.; Recker, Kara M.

doi:10.1080/13875868.2020.1734601

Cited by 6 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the same time, this function was cubic for the performance of participants in the visual and bimodal conditions. In line with findings from Plumert et al (2019; see also Hund et al 2020), this may indicate that participants split the space into two spaces (left and right) and gravitated towards the center of each half in the visual conditions (see also Huttenlocher et al 1994). In accordance with the category adjustment model (Huttenlocher et al 1991), encoding space haptically may refrain participants from using more fine-grained categories when exploring spatial layouts, and instead, they may use the entire space as one single entity.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

“…Spatial scaling of maps requires a comparison of differentsized spaces and demands an understanding of the connection between these spaces (Frick and Newcombe 2012). In order to investigate this ability, experimenters usually instruct participants to encode a simple map including a target and ask them to locate a target in an empty space at the same location (i.e., the referent space; Frick and Newcombe 2012; Hund et al 2020;Huttenlocher et al 1999;Möhring et al 2014Möhring et al , 2015Möhring et al , 2018Plumert et al 2019;Vasilyeva and Huttenlocher 2004; but see Gilligan et al 2018 for a discrimination task). Crucially, maps and the referent space differ in size so that participants need to scale spatial information from one space to the other.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most spatial scaling studies have been conducted in the visual domain (Frick and Newcombe 2012;Gilligan et al 2018;Hund et al 2020;Huttenlocher et al 1999;Möhring et al 2014Möhring et al , 2015Möhring et al , 2016Möhring et al , 2018Plumert et al 2019;Vasilyeva and Huttenlocher 2004), with several studies indicating the Editor: Albert Postma (Utrecht University); Reviewers: Stephanie N. Pantelides (University of Cyprus) and a second researcher who prefers to remain anonymous. This article is associated with a presentation given at the "8th International Conference on Spatial Cognition: Cognition and Action in a Plurality of Spaces" (ICSC 2021; https:// www.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Differences in adults’ spatial scaling based on visual or haptic information

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study examined differences in adults’ spatial-scaling abilities across three perceptual conditions: (1) visual, (2) haptic, and (3) visual and haptic. Participants were instructed to encode the position of a convex target presented in a simple map without a time limit. Immediately after encoding the map, participants were presented with a referent space and asked to place a disc at the same location from memory. All spaces were designed as tactile graphics. Positions of targets varied along the horizontal dimension. The referent space was constant in size while sizes of maps were systematically varied, resulting in three scaling factor conditions: 1:4, 1:2, 1:1. Sixty adults participated in the study (M = 21.18; SD = 1.05). One-third of them was blindfolded throughout the entire experiment (haptic condition). The second group of participants was allowed to see the graphics (visual condition); the third group were instructed to see and touch the graphics (bimodal condition). An analysis of participants’ absolute errors showed that participants produced larger errors in the haptic condition as opposed to the visual and bimodal conditions. There was also a significant interaction effect between scaling factor and perceptual condition. In the visual and bimodal conditions, results showed a linear increase in errors with higher scaling factors (which may suggest that adults adopted mental transformation strategies during the spatial scaling process), whereas, in the haptic condition, this relation was quadratic. Findings imply that adults’ spatial-scaling performance decreases when visual information is not available.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Differences in adults’ spatial scaling based on visual or haptic information

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To date, only few studies have met these methodological requirements 5 , 12 , 13 . The majority of previous research has typically measured accuracy but not response times 1 , 2 , 4 , 6 , 9 , 10 . Other studies have only tested a single scaling factor in a within-subject design 6 , making it difficult to study systematic changes in participants‘ performance as a function of scaling factor.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the present study, we adressed this issue and used a novel three-step approach (for related procedures, cf. 2 , 6 , 23 ). More concrete, the experimental task consisted of three subsequent stages: learning the map, imagining the map at a given scale (with an assessment of response times at this stage), and giving a response in an empty referent space (with an assessment of errors at this stage).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Blindfolded adults use mental transformation strategies for spatial scaling of tactile maps

Szubielska

Möhring

2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study tested strategies of spatial scaling in the haptic domain. Blindfolded adults (N = 31, aged 20–24 years) were presented with an embossed graphic including a target and asked to encode a target location on this map, imagine this map at a given scale, and to localize a target at the same spot on an empty referent space. Maps varied in three different sizes whereas the referent space had a constant size, resulting in three different scaling factors (1:1, 1:2, 1:4). Participants’ response times and localization errors were measured. Analyses indicated that both response times and errors increased with higher scaling factors, suggesting the usage of mental transformation stratergies for spatial scaling. Overall, the present study provides a suitable, novel methodology to assess spatial scaling in the haptic domain.

show abstract

Effects of scaling direction on adults’ spatial scaling in different perceptual domains

Szubielska,

Szewczyk,

Augustynowicz

et al. 2023

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study investigated adults’ strategies of spatial scaling from memory in three perceptual conditions (visual, haptic, and visuo-haptic) when scaling up and down. Following previous research, we predicted the usage of mental transformation strategies. In all conditions, participants (N = 90, aged 19–28 years) were presented with tactile, colored graphics which allowed to visually and haptically explore spatial information. Participants were first asked to encode a map including a target. Then, they were instructed to place a response object at the same place on an empty, constant-sized referent space. Maps had five different sizes resulting in five scaling factors (3:1, 2:1, 1:1, 1:2, 1:3). This manipulation also allowed assessing potentially symmetric effects of scaling direction on adults’ responses. Response times and absolute errors served as dependent variables. In line with our hypotheses, the changes in these dependent variables were best explained by a quadratic function which suggests the usage of mental transformation strategies for spatial scaling. There were no differences between perceptual conditions concerning the influence of scaling factor on dependent variables. Results revealed symmetric effects of scaling direction on participants’ accuracy whereas there were small differences for response times. Our findings highlight the usage of mental transformation strategies in adults’ spatial scaling, irrespective of perceptual modality and scaling direction.

show abstract

Visually scaling distance from memory: do visible midline boundaries make a difference?

Cited by 6 publications

References 40 publications

Differences in adults’ spatial scaling based on visual or haptic information

Differences in adults’ spatial scaling based on visual or haptic information

Blindfolded adults use mental transformation strategies for spatial scaling of tactile maps

Effects of scaling direction on adults’ spatial scaling in different perceptual domains

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About