Who gets lost and why: A representative cross-sectional survey on sociodemographic and vestibular determinants of wayfinding strategies

Abstract

2 When we think of our family and friends, we probably know someone who is good at finding 3 their way and someone else that easily get lost. We still know little about the biological and 4 environmental factors that influence our navigational ability. Here, we investigated the 5 frequency and sociodemographic determinants of wayfinding and their association with 6 vestibular function in a representative cross-sectional sample (N = 783) of the adult German-7 speaking population. Wayfinding was assessed using the Wayfinding Strategy Scale, a self-8 report scale that produces two scores for each participant representing to what degree they rely 9 on route-based or orientation (map-based) strategies. We were interested in the following 10 research questions: (1) the frequency and determinants of wayfinding strategies in a population-11 based representative sample, (2) the relationship between vestibular function and strategy 12 choice and (3) how sociodemographic factors influence general wayfinding ability as measured 13 using a combined score from both strategy scores. Our linear regression models showed that 14 being male, having a higher education, higher age and lower regional urbanization increased 15 orientation strategy scores. Vertigo/dizziness reduced the scores of both the orientation and the 16 route strategies. Using a novel approach, we grouped participants by their combined strategy 17 scores in a multinomial regression model, to see whether individuals prefer one strategy over 18 the other. The majority of individuals reported using either both or no strategy, instead of 19 preferring one strategy over the other. Young age and reduced vestibular function were 20 indicative of using no strategy. In summary, wayfinding ability depends on both biological and 21 environmental factors; all sociodemographic factors except income. Over a third of the 22 population, predominantly under the age of 35, does not successfully use either strategy. This 23 represents a change in our wayfinding skills, which may result from the technological advances 24 in navigational aids over the last few decades. 25 3 26 Introduction 27 Wayfinding; the ability to find one's way in an unfamiliar environment, has an outstanding 28 place among our cultural skills. The ability to find one's way in a complex environment is no 29 trivial feat. It is therefore not surprising that we find a high degree of variability in individuals' 30 ability and the strategies used and declines in normal aging [1], in neurodegenerative disease 31 [2] and with vestibular dysfunction [3,4]. These strategies have been broadly defined as route 32 strategies and orientation strategies [5,6]. The difference between these two strategies is 33 demonstrated in Figure 1. 34 35 Figure 1. Illustration of the two main wayfinding strategy types. Left: the orientation strategy, in 36 which individuals use spatial relations and global reference points such as the sun or cardinal directions to 37 navigate. Individuals that use this strategy often report having a 2D m...

Entropy of city street networks linked to future spatial navigation ability

“…Figures 1g-h represent the effect of the environment on W F stratified by age, gender, and education. We replicate previous studies showing that wayfinding performance decreases with age [27,28], males perform better than females [29], and performance increases with the level of education [30,31]. Here we now report that participants raised outside cities are more accurate navigators than city-dwellers.…”

Using visual scene memory accuracy as a predictor of spatial navigation performance

“…In accordance with the hypothesis and previous literature, gender bias on the SBSODS was also identified. Males appraised their SOD (on average) significantly higher than their female counterparts (Castelli et al, 2008), despite non‐significant navigation task performance differences across genders (Coluccia & Louse, 2004; Nori & Piccardi, 2015; Picucci et al, 2011; Torres‐Guijarro & Bengoechea, 2016; Ulrich et al, 2019). Nori and Piccardi (2015) speculated that the underestimation of spatial abilities in females might stem from the fact that they typically require a longer learning time than males (Nori et al, 2018; Piccardi et al, 2008).…”

“…While clinical assessment of everyday navigation abilities relies predominantly on self‐reports, evidence continues to question their validity and reliability (Meade et al, 2019; Munion et al, 2019; Ventura et al, 2013). For instance, it has been found that males consistently overestimate their navigation ability despite performing similarly to females on many objective route‐tracking tasks (Castelli et al, 2008; Coluccia & Louse, 2004; Torres‐Guijarro & Bengoechea, 2016; Ulrich et al, 2019). Furthermore, van der Ham et al's (2021) comparison of self‐reported versus objective navigation abilities revealed systemic gender and age biases—with increasing ability overestimation as a function of age.…”