Literature DB >> 32346822

Does active learning benefit spatial memory during navigation with restricted peripheral field?

Erica M Barhorst-Cates1, Kristina M Rand2, Sarah H Creem-Regehr2.   

Abstract

Spatial learning of real-world environments is impaired with severely restricted peripheral field of view (FOV). In prior research, the effects of restricted FOV on spatial learning have been studied using passive learning paradigms - learners walk along pre-defined paths and are told the location of targets to be remembered. Our research has shown that mobility demands and environmental complexity may contribute to impaired spatial learning with restricted FOV through attentional mechanisms. Here, we examine the role of active navigation, both in locomotion and in target search. First, we compared effects of active versus passive locomotion (walking with a physical guide versus being pushed in a wheelchair) on a task of pointing to remembered targets in participants with simulated 10° FOV. We found similar performance between active and passive locomotion conditions in both simpler (Experiment 1) and more complex (Experiment 2) spatial learning tasks. Experiment 3 required active search for named targets to remember while navigating, using both a mild and a severe FOV restriction. We observed no difference in pointing accuracy between the two FOV restrictions but an increase in attentional demands with severely restricted FOV. Experiment 4 compared active and passive search with severe FOV restriction, within subjects. We found no difference in pointing accuracy, but observed an increase in cognitive load in active versus passive search. Taken together, in the context of navigating with restricted FOV, neither locomotion method nor level of active search affected spatial learning. However, the greater cognitive demands could have counteracted the potential advantage of the active learning conditions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Active and passive; Locomotion; Navigation; Peripheral field loss; Visual search

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32346822      PMCID: PMC7387134          DOI: 10.3758/s13414-020-02038-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 1943-3921            Impact factor:   2.199


  41 in total

1.  The specificity of memory enhancement during interaction with a virtual environment.

Authors:  B M Brooks; E A Attree; F D Rose; B R Clifford; A G Leadbetter
Journal:  Memory       Date:  1999-01

2.  Space-time relativity in self-motion reproduction.

Authors:  Stefan Glasauer; Erich Schneider; Renato Grasso; Yuri P Ivanenko
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2006-10-18       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Automatic spatial updating during locomotion without vision.

Authors:  M J Farrell; J A Thomson
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A       Date:  1998-08

4.  Let me be your guide: physical guidance improves spatial learning for older adults with simulated low vision.

Authors:  Erica M Barhorst-Cates; Kristina M Rand; Sarah H Creem-Regehr
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-08-12       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Point-and-shoot memories: the influence of taking photos on memory for a museum tour.

Authors:  Linda A Henkel
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2013-12-05

6.  Spatial learning while navigating with severely degraded viewing: The role of attention and mobility monitoring.

Authors:  Kristina M Rand; Sarah H Creem-Regehr; William B Thompson
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2015-02-23       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  Distance underestimation in virtual space is sensitive to gender but not activity-passivity or mode of interaction.

Authors:  Nigel Foreman; George Sandamas; David Newson
Journal:  Cyberpsychol Behav       Date:  2004-08

8.  Association of visual field loss and mobility performance in older adults: Salisbury Eye Evaluation Study.

Authors:  Kathleen A Turano; Aimee T Broman; Karen Bandeen-Roche; Beatriz Munoz; Gary S Rubin; Shelia West
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 1.973

9.  Updating after rotational and translational body movements: coordinate structure of perspective space.

Authors:  C C Presson; D R Montello
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.490

10.  Indoor Spatial Updating with Reduced Visual Information.

Authors:  Gordon E Legge; Rachel Gage; Yihwa Baek; Tiana M Bochsler
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-03-04       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  How can basic research on spatial cognition enhance the visual accessibility of architecture for people with low vision?

Authors:  Sarah H Creem-Regehr; Erica M Barhorst-Cates; Margaret R Tarampi; Kristina M Rand; Gordon E Legge
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2021-01-07
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.