Literature DB >> 31102190

Instructions matter: Individual differences in navigation strategy and ability.

Alexander P Boone1, Bryan Maghen2, Mary Hegarty2.   

Abstract

Individual differences in navigation strategy in the dual-solution paradigm (DSP) indicate that some people prefer to take learned routes, while others prefer to take shortcuts (Boone, Gong, & Hegarty, Memory & Cognition, 46, 909-922, 2018; Marchette, Bakker, & Shelton, Journal of Neuroscience, 31, 15264-15268, 2011). Although work using the DSP has highlighted biases toward certain navigation strategies within individuals, a question remains as to why navigators do show a bias. Here, we questioned whether a bias toward navigation by learned routes indicates inability to take shortcuts, or whether other factors are at play, such as task demands and preferences. In two experiments, we began to untangle the association between the ability to construct survey knowledge, which is necessary if one is to take shortcuts (i.e., competence), and navigation strategy (i.e., performance) in virtual-reality navigation. Participants learned a route through a virtual environment and then navigated to goal locations in two experimental sessions. In Experiment 1, each participant navigated under two different instructions ("go to the goal" vs. "take the shortest path to the goal"), whereas in Experiment 2 two groups navigated under the same instructions in both sessions. Converging results from these experiments indicated that participants used more shortcuts overall under the shortcut instructions, and that this was not attributable to additional task exposure. Men were more likely to take shortcuts, under both the standard and shortcut instructions. This work indicates that the use of learned routes in the DSP does not necessarily imply that a person cannot take a shortcut, highlighting a dissociation between strategy and ability.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Efficiency; Individual differences; Navigation; Sex differences; Strategy

Year:  2019        PMID: 31102190     DOI: 10.3758/s13421-019-00941-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  16 in total

1.  Body-based senses enhance knowledge of directions in large-scale environments.

Authors:  David Waller; Jack M Loomis; Daniel B M Haun
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-02

2.  Inertial cues do not enhance knowledge of environmental layout.

Authors:  David Waller; Jack M Loomis; Sibylle D Steck
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2003-12

3.  Sex Differences in Exploration Behavior and the Relationship to Harm Avoidance.

Authors:  Kyle T Gagnon; Elizabeth A Cashdan; Jeanine K Stefanucci; Sarah H Creem-Regehr
Journal:  Hum Nat       Date:  2016-03

4.  Spatial knowledge acquisition from direct experience in the environment: individual differences in the development of metric knowledge and the integration of separately learned places.

Authors:  Toru Ishikawa; Daniel R Montello
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2005-12-22       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Males and females use different distal cues in a virtual environment navigation task.

Authors:  N J Sandstrom; J Kaufman; S A Huettel
Journal:  Brain Res Cogn Brain Res       Date:  1998-04

6.  Knowing where and getting there: a human navigation network.

Authors:  E A Maguire; N Burgess; J G Donnett; R S Frackowiak; C D Frith; J O'Keefe
Journal:  Science       Date:  1998-05-08       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Active and passive spatial learning in human navigation: acquisition of graph knowledge.

Authors:  Elizabeth R Chrastil; William H Warren
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2014-11-24       Impact factor: 3.051

8.  Cognitive strategies dependent on the hippocampus and caudate nucleus in human navigation: variability and change with practice.

Authors:  Giuseppe Iaria; Michael Petrides; Alain Dagher; Bruce Pike; Véronique D Bohbot
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2003-07-02       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  How do (some) people make a cognitive map? Routes, places, and working memory.

Authors:  Steven M Weisberg; Nora S Newcombe
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2015-11-23       Impact factor: 3.051

10.  Persistent and stable biases in spatial learning mechanisms predict navigational style.

Authors:  Andrew J Furman; Amy M Clements-Stephens; Steven A Marchette; Amy L Shelton
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 3.526

View more
  6 in total

1.  Heterogeneous correlations between hippocampus volume and cognitive map accuracy among healthy young adults.

Authors:  Qiliang He; Thackery I Brown
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2019-12-10       Impact factor: 4.027

2.  Age-Related Changes in Spatial Navigation Are Evident by Midlife and Differ by Sex.

Authors:  Shuying Yu; Alexander P Boone; Chuanxiuyue He; Rie C Davis; Mary Hegarty; Elizabeth R Chrastil; Emily G Jacobs
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2021-04-05

Review 3.  Hippocampal volume and navigational ability: The map(ping) is not to scale.

Authors:  Steven M Weisberg; Arne D Ekstrom
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2021-03-17       Impact factor: 9.052

4.  A comparison of reinforcement learning models of human spatial navigation.

Authors:  Qiliang He; Jancy Ling Liu; Lou Eschapasse; Elizabeth H Beveridge; Thackery I Brown
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-08-17       Impact factor: 4.996

5.  The Role of Gender and Familiarity in a Modified Version of the Almeria Boxes Room Spatial Task.

Authors:  Alessia Bocchi; Massimiliano Palmiero; Jose Manuel Cimadevilla Redondo; Laura Tascón; Raffaella Nori; Laura Piccardi
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2021-05-22

6.  Childhood wayfinding experience explains sex and individual differences in adult wayfinding strategy and anxiety.

Authors:  Vanessa Vieites; Shannon M Pruden; Bethany C Reeb-Sutherland
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2020-03-17
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.