Reorienting when cues conflict: evidence for an adaptive-combination view.

Proponents of a geometric module claim that human adults accomplish spatial reorientation in a fundamentally different way than young children and nonhuman animals do. However, reporting two experiments that used a conflict paradigm, this article shows striking similarities between human adults and young children, as well as nonhuman animals. Specifically, Experiment 1 demonstrates that adults favor geometric information in a small room and rely on features in a larger room, whereas Experiment 2 demonstrates that experience in a larger room produces dominance of features over geometric cues in a small room-the first human case of reliance on features that contradict geometric information. Thus, use of features during reorientation depends on the size of the environment and learning history. These results clearly undermine the modularity claim and the view that feature use during reorientation is purely associative, and we discuss the findings within an adaptive-combination view, according to which a weighting system determines use of feature or geometric cues during reorientation.