Spatial memory for vertical locations

Most studies on spatial memory refer to the horizontal plane, leaving an open question as to whether findings generalize to vertical spaces where gravity and the visual upright of our surrounding space are salient orientation cues. In three experiments, we examined which reference frame is used to organize memory for vertical locations: the one based on the body vertical, the visual-room vertical, or the direction of gravity. Participants judged interobject spatial relationships learned from a vertical layout in a virtual room. During learning and testing, we varied the orientation of the participant’s body (upright vs. lying sideways) and the visually presented room relative to gravity (e.g., rotated by 90° along the frontal plane). Across all experiments, participants made quicker or more accurate judgments when the room was oriented in the same way as during learning with respect to their body, irrespective of their orientations relative to gravity. This suggests that participants employed an egocentric body-based reference frame for representing vertical object locations. Our study also revealed an effect of body–gravity alignment during testing. Participants recalled spatial relations more accurately when upright, regardless of the body and visual-room orientation during learning. This finding is consistent with a hypothesis of selection conflict between different reference frames. Overall, our results suggest that a body-based reference frame is preferred over salient allocentric reference frames in memory for vertical locations perceived from a single view. Further, memory of vertical space seems to be tuned to work best in the default upright body orientation

No advantage for remembering horizontal over vertical spatial locations learned from a single viewpoint

Previous behavioral and neurophysiological research has shown better memory for horizontal than for vertical locations. In these studies, participants navigated toward these locations. In the present study we investigated whether the orientation of the spatial plane per se was responsible for this difference. We thus had participants learn locations visually from a single perspective and retrieve them from multiple viewpoints. In three experiments, participants studied colored tags on a horizontally or vertically oriented board within a virtual room and recalled these locations with different layout orientations (Exp. 1) or from different room-based perspectives (Exps. 2 and 3). All experiments revealed evidence for equal recall performance in horizontal and vertical memory. In addition, the patterns for recall from different test orientations were rather similar. Consequently, our results suggest that memory is qualitatively similar for both vertical and horizontal two-dimensional locations, given that these locations are learned from a single viewpoint. Thus, prior differences in spatial memory may have originated from the structure of the space or the fact that participants navigated through it. Additionally, the strong performance advantages for perspective shifts (Exps. 2 and 3) relative to layout rotations (Exp. 1) suggest that configurational judgments are not only based on memory of the relations between target objects, but also encompass the relations between target objects and the surrounding room—for example, in the form of a memorized view

Learning new sensorimotor contingencies:Effects of long-term use of sensory augmentation on the brain and conscious perception

Theories of embodied cognition propose that perception is shaped by sensory stimuli and by the actions of the organism. Following sensorimotor contingency theory, the mastery of lawful relations between own behavior and resulting changes in sensory signals, called sensorimotor contingencies, is constitutive of conscious perception. Sensorimotor contingency theory predicts that, after training, knowledge relating to new sensorimotor contingencies develops, leading to changes in the activation of sensorimotor systems, and concomitant changes in perception. In the present study, we spell out this hypothesis in detail and investigate whether it is possible to learn new sensorimotor contingencies by sensory augmentation. Specifically, we designed an fMRI compatible sensory augmentation device, the feelSpace belt, which gives orientation information about the direction of magnetic north via vibrotactile stimulation on the waist of participants. In a longitudinal study, participants trained with this belt for seven weeks in natural environment. Our EEG results indicate that training with the belt leads to changes in sleep architecture early in the training phase, compatible with the consolidation of procedural learning as well as increased sensorimotor processing and motor programming. The fMRI results suggest that training entails activity in sensory as well as higher motor centers and brain areas known to be involved in navigation. These neural changes are accompanied with changes in how space and the belt signal are perceived, as well as with increased trust in navigational ability. Thus, our data on physiological processes and subjective experiences are compatible with the hypothesis that new sensorimotor contingencies can be acquired using sensory augmentation

Verbal shadowing and visual interference in spatial memory.

Spatial memory is thought to be organized along experienced views and allocentric reference axes. Memory access from different perspectives typically yields V-patterns for egocentric encoding (monotonic decline in performance along with the angular deviation from the experienced perspectives) and W-patterns for axes encoding (better performance along parallel and orthogonal perspectives than along oblique perspectives). We showed that learning an object array with a verbal secondary task reduced W-patterns compared with learning without verbal shadowing. This suggests that axes encoding happened in a verbal format; for example, by rows and columns. Alternatively, general cognitive load from the secondary task prevented memorizing relative to a spatial axis. Independent of encoding, pointing with a surrounding room visible yielded stronger W-patterns compared with pointing with no room visible. This suggests that the visible room geometry interfered with the memorized room geometry. With verbal shadowing and without visual interference only V-patterns remained; otherwise, V- and W-patterns were combined. Verbal encoding and visual interference explain when W-patterns can be expected alongside V-patterns and thus can help in resolving different performance patterns in a wide range of experiments

Self-paced presentation times within screen 2.

<p>“Rotation” indicates that the layout rotated between screen 1 and 2 (i.e., the conditions “1 & 3 same,” “2 & 3 same,” and “all diff”). “No rotation” indicates that the layout had the same orientation (i.e., the conditions “1 & 2 same” and “all same”). In the latter case, the layout stayed at the same screen location for (no) layout rotations or moved to another screen side for (no) screen rotations.</p

Flexible integration of a navigable, clustered environment

The representation of navigable space, consisting of multiple interconnected spaces, yet is not well understood. Weexamined different levels of integration within memory (local, regional, global). Participants learned two distinctive regions ofa virtual environment that converged at a common transition-point. Subsequently, we tested their memory with a pointing task,varying body alignment during pointing, corridor distance to and regional belonging of the target. Pointing latency increasedwith increasing distance to the target and when pointing into the other region. Further, alignment with local, regional and globalreference frames were found to facilitate pointing latency. These findings suggest that participants memorized local corridors,clustered corridors into regions, and also formed global reference frames, thus, represented the environment on multiple levelsof integration. They are inconsistent with conceptions of spatial memory for navigable environments based either on exclusiverepresentation within a single reference frame or exclusive reliance on local reference frames

When in doubt follow your nose - a wayfinding strategy

Route selection is governed by various strategies which often allow minimizing the required memory capacity. Previous research showed that navigators primarily remember information at route decision points and at route turns, rather than at intersections which required straight walking. However, when actually navigating the route or indicating directional decisions, navigators make fewer errors when they are required to walk straight. This tradeoff between location memory and route decisions accuracy was interpreted as a “when in doubt follow your nose” strategy which allows navigators to only memorize turns and walk straight by default, thus considerably reducing the number of intersections to memorize. These findings were based on newly learned routes. In the present study, we show that such an asymmetry in route memory also prevails for planning routes within highly familiar environments. Participants planned route sequences between locations in their city of residency by pressing arrow keys on a keyboard. They tended to ignore straight walking intersections, but they ignored turns much less so. However, for reported intersections participants were quicker at indicating straight walking than turning. Together with results described in the literature, these findings suggest that a “when in doubt follow your nose strategy” is applied also within highly familiar spaces and might originate from limited working memory capacity during planning a route.ISSN:1664-107