English
 
User Manual Privacy Policy Disclaimer Contact us
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  Qualitative differences in memory for vista and environmental spaces are caused by opaque borders, not movement or successive presentation

Meilinger, T., Strickrodt, M., & Bülthoff, H. (2016). Qualitative differences in memory for vista and environmental spaces are caused by opaque borders, not movement or successive presentation. Cognition, 155, 77-95. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2016.06.003.

Item is

Basic

show hide
Item Permalink: http://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0000-796B-1 Version Permalink: http://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0000-796C-0
Genre: Journal Article

Files

show Files

Locators

show
hide
Locator:
Link (Any fulltext)
Description:
-

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Meilinger, T1, 2, 3, Author              
Strickrodt, M1, 3, Author              
Bülthoff, HH1, 3, 4, Author              
Affiliations:
1Department Human Perception, Cognition and Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society, ou_1497797              
2Project group: Social & Spatial Cognition, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society, ou_2528706              
3Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society, ou_1497794              
4Project group: Cybernetics Approach to Perception & Action, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society, ou_2528701              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: -
 Abstract: Two classes of space define our everyday experience within our surrounding environment: vista spaces, such as rooms or streets which can be perceived from one vantage point, and environmental spaces, for example, buildings and towns which are grasped from multiple views acquired during locomotion. However, theories of spatial representations often treat both spaces as equal. The present experiments show that this assumption cannot be upheld. Participants learned exactly the same layout of objects either within a single room or spread across multiple corridors. By utilizing a pointing and a placement task we tested the acquired configurational memory. In Experiment 1 retrieving memory of the object layout acquired in environmental space was affected by the distance of the traveled path and the order in which the objects were learned. In contrast, memory retrieval of objects learned in vista space was not bound to distance and relied on different ordering schemes (e.g., along the layout structure). Furthermore, spatial memory of both spaces differed with respect to the employed reference frame orientation. Environmental space memory was organized along the learning experience rather than layout intrinsic structure. In Experiment 2 participants memorized the object layout presented within the vista space room of Experiment 1 while the learning procedure emulated environmental space learning (movement, successive object presentation). Neither factor rendered similar results as found in environmental space learning. This shows that memory differences between vista and environmental space originated mainly from the spatial compartmentalization which was unique to environmental space learning. Our results suggest that transferring conclusions from findings obtained in vista space to environmental spaces and vice versa should be made with caution.

Details

show
hide
Language(s):
 Dates: 2016-10
 Publication Status: Published in print
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Method: -
 Identifiers: DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.06.003
BibTex Citekey: MeilingerSB2016
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: Cognition
Source Genre: Journal
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: -
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 155 Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: 77 - 95 Identifier: -