Probing the invariant structure of spatial knowledge: Support for the cognitive graph hypothesis.

We tested four hypotheses about the structure of spatial knowledge used for navigation: (1) the Euclidean hypothesis, a geometrically consistent map; (2) the Neighborhood hypothesis, adjacency relations between spatial regions, based on visible boundaries; (3) the Cognitive Graph hypothesis, a network of paths between places, labeled with approximate local distances and angles; and (4) the Constancy hypothesis, whatever geometric properties are invariant during learning. In two experiments, different groups of participants learned three virtual hedge mazes, which varied specific geometric properties (Euclidean Control Maze, Elastic Maze with stretching paths, Swap Maze with alternating paths to the same place). Spatial knowledge was then tested using three navigation tasks (metric shortcuts on empty ground plane, neighborhood shortcuts with visible boundaries, route task in corridors). They yielded the following results: (a) Metric shortcuts were insensitive to detectable shifts in target location, inconsistent with the Euclidean hypothesis. (b) Neighborhood shortcuts were constrained by visible boundaries in the Elastic Maze, but not in the Swap Maze, contrary to the Neighborhood and Constancy hypotheses. (c) The route task indicated that a graph of the maze was acquired in all environments, including knowledge of local path lengths. We conclude that primary spatial knowledge is consistent with the Cognitive Graph hypothesis. Neighborhoods are derived from the graph, and local distance and angle information is not embedded in a geometrically consistent map.