Literature DB >> 16719662

Individual skill differences and large-scale environmental learning.

Alexa W Fields1, Amy L Shelton.   

Abstract

Spatial skills are known to vary widely among normal individuals. This project was designed to address whether these individual differences are differentially related to large-scale environmental learning from route (ground-level) and survey (aerial) perspectives. Participants learned two virtual environments (route and survey) with limited exposure and tested on judgments about relative locations of objects. They also performed a series of spatial and nonspatial component skill tests. With limited learning, performance after route encoding was worse than performance after survey encoding. Furthermore, performance after route and survey encoding appeared to be preferentially linked to perspective and object-based transformations, respectively. Together, the results provide clues to how different skills might be engaged by different individuals for the same goal of learning a large-scale environment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16719662     DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.32.3.506

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn        ISSN: 0278-7393            Impact factor:   3.051


  22 in total

1.  Fixed versus dynamic orientations in environmental learning from ground-level and aerial perspectives.

Authors:  Amy L Shelton; Holly A Pippitt
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2006-09-07

2.  Active route learning in virtual environments: disentangling movement control from intention, instruction specificity, and navigation control.

Authors:  Rul von Stülpnagel; Melanie C Steffens
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2012-08-26

3.  How directions of route descriptions influence orientation specificity: the contribution of spatial abilities.

Authors:  Chiara Meneghetti; Veronica Muffato; Diego Varotto; Rossana De Beni
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2016-02-22

4.  Cognitive mappers to creatures of habit: differential engagement of place and response learning mechanisms predicts human navigational behavior.

Authors:  Steven A Marchette; Arnold Bakker; Amy L Shelton
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2011-10-26       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Age-related preference for geometric spatial cues during real-world navigation.

Authors:  Marcia Bécu; Denis Sheynikhovich; Guillaume Tatur; Catherine Persephone Agathos; Luca Leonardo Bologna; José-Alain Sahel; Angelo Arleo
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2019-09-23

6.  Verbalizing, visualizing, and navigating: The effect of strategies on encoding a large-scale virtual environment.

Authors:  David J M Kraemer; Victor R Schinazi; Philip B Cawkwell; Anand Tekriwal; Russell A Epstein; Sharon L Thompson-Schill
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2016-09-26       Impact factor: 3.051

7.  Transformations and representations supporting spatial perspective taking.

Authors:  Alfred B Yu; Jeffrey M Zacks
Journal:  Spat Cogn Comput       Date:  2017-06-01

8.  Orientation dependence of spatial memory acquired from auditory experience.

Authors:  Naohide Yamamoto; Amy L Shelton
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2009-04

9.  Considering spatial ability in virtual route learning in early aging.

Authors:  Valérie Gyselinck; Chiara Meneghetti; Monica Bormetti; Eric Orriols; Pascale Piolino; Rossana De Beni
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2013-03-28

10.  Cognitive styles and mental rotation ability in map learning.

Authors:  Francesca Pazzaglia; Angelica Moè
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2013-06-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.