Literature DB >> 15302327

Geometric determinants of human spatial memory.

Tom Hartley1, Iris Trinkler, Neil Burgess.   

Abstract

Geometric alterations to the boundaries of a virtual environment were used to investigate the representations underlying human spatial memory. Subjects encountered a cue object in a simple rectangular enclosure, with distant landmarks for orientation. After a brief delay, during which they were removed from the arena, subjects were returned to it at a new location and orientation and asked to mark the place where the cue had been. On some trials the geometry (size, aspect ratio) of the arena was varied between presentation and testing. Responses tended to lie somewhere between a location that maintained fixed distances from nearby walls and a location that maintained fixed ratios of the distances between opposing walls. The former were more common after expansions and for cued locations nearer to the edge while the latter were more common after contractions and for locations nearer to the center. The spatial distributions of responses predicted by various simple geometric models were compared to the data. The best fitting model was one derived from the response properties of 'place cells' in the rat hippocampus, which matches the 'proximities' 1/(d+c) of the cue to the four walls of the arena, where d is the distance to a wall and c is a global constant. Subjects also tended to adopt the same orientation at presentation and testing, although this was not due to using a view matching strategy, which could be ruled out in 50% of responses. Disoriented responses were most often seen where the cued location was near the center of the arena or where the long axis of a rectangular arena was changed between presentation and testing, suggesting that the geometry of the arena acts as a weak cue to orientation. Overall, the results suggest a process of visual landmark matching to determine orientation, combined with an abstract representation of the proximity of the cued location to the walls of the arena consistent with the neural representation of location in the hippocampus.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15302327     DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2003.12.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognition        ISSN: 0010-0277


  33 in total

1.  Spatial reorientation by geometry with freestanding objects and extended surfaces: a unifying view.

Authors:  Tommaso Pecchia; Giorgio Vallortigara
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-01-11       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Common Neural Representations for Visually Guided Reorientation and Spatial Imagery.

Authors:  Lindsay K Vass; Russell A Epstein
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 5.357

Review 3.  Is there a geometric module for spatial orientation? Squaring theory and evidence.

Authors:  Ken Cheng; Nora S Newcombe
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2005-02

4.  Distinct error-correcting and incidental learning of location relative to landmarks and boundaries.

Authors:  Christian F Doeller; Neil Burgess
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2008-04-14       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 5.  25 years of research on the use of geometry in spatial reorientation: a current theoretical perspective.

Authors:  Ken Cheng; Janellen Huttenlocher; Nora S Newcombe
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2013-12

Review 6.  Framing the grid: effect of boundaries on grid cells and navigation.

Authors:  Julija Krupic; Marius Bauza; Stephen Burton; John O'Keefe
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2016-05-10       Impact factor: 5.182

7.  Constructing representations of spatial location from briefly presented displays.

Authors:  Glenn Gunzelmann; Don R Lyon
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2016-07-27

8.  Deforming the metric of cognitive maps distorts memory.

Authors:  Jacob L S Bellmund; William de Cothi; Tom A Ruiter; Matthias Nau; Caswell Barry; Christian F Doeller
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2019-11-18

9.  Electrophysiological Signatures of Spatial Boundaries in the Human Subiculum.

Authors:  Sang Ah Lee; Jonathan F Miller; Andrew J Watrous; Michael R Sperling; Ashwini Sharan; Gregory A Worrell; Brent M Berry; Joshua P Aronson; Kathryn A Davis; Robert E Gross; Bradley Lega; Sameer Sheth; Sandhitsu R Das; Joel M Stein; Richard Gorniak; Daniel S Rizzuto; Joshua Jacobs
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2018-02-21       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Assessing human reorientation ability inside virtual reality environments: the effects of retention interval and landmark characteristics.

Authors:  Andrea Bosco; Luciana Picucci; Alessandro O Caffò; Giulio E Lancioni; Valérie Gyselinck
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2008-03-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.