English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  Similarities and differences in spatial and non-spatial cognitive maps

Wu, C., Schulz, E., Garvert, M., Meder, B., & Schuck, N. (2020). Similarities and differences in spatial and non-spatial cognitive maps. PLoS Computational Biology, 16(9), 1-28. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008149.

Item is

Basic

show hide
Genre: Journal Article

Files

show Files

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Wu, CM, Author              
Schulz, E1, 2, Author              
Garvert, MM, Author
Meder, B, Author
Schuck, NW, Author
Affiliations:
1Research Group Computational Principles of Intelligence, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society, ou_3189356              
2Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society, Spemannstrasse 38, 72076 Tübingen, DE, ou_1497794              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: -
 Abstract: Learning and generalization in spatial domains is often thought to rely on a “cognitive map”, representing relationships between spatial locations. Recent research suggests that this same neural machinery is also recruited for reasoning about more abstract, conceptual forms of knowledge. Yet, to what extent do spatial and conceptual reasoning share common computational principles, and what are the implications for behavior? Using a within-subject design we studied how participants used spatial or conceptual distances to generalize and search for correlated rewards in successive multi-armed bandit tasks. Participant behavior indicated sensitivity to both spatial and conceptual distance, and was best captured using a Bayesian model of generalization that formalized distance-dependent generalization and uncertainty-guided exploration as a Gaussian Process regression with a radial basis function kernel. The same Gaussian Process model best captured human search decisions and judgments in both domains, and could simulate realistic learning curves, where we found equivalent levels of generalization in spatial and conceptual tasks. At the same time, we also find characteristic differences between domains. Relative to the spatial domain, participants showed reduced levels of uncertainty-directed exploration and increased levels of random exploration in the conceptual domain. Participants also displayed a one-directional transfer effect, where experience in the spatial task boosted performance in the conceptual task, but not vice versa. While confidence judgments indicated that participants were sensitive to the uncertainty of their knowledge in both tasks, they did not or could not leverage their estimates of uncertainty to guide exploration in the conceptual task. These results support the notion that value-guided learning and generalization recruit cognitive-map dependent computational mechanisms in spatial and conceptual domains. Yet both behavioral and model-based analyses suggest domain specific differences in how these representations map onto actions.

Details

show
hide
Language(s):
 Dates: 2020-072020-09
 Publication Status: Published online
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Type: -
 Identifiers: DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008149
eDoc: e1008149
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: PLoS Computational Biology
Source Genre: Journal
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: San Francisco, CA : Public Library of Science
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 16 (9) Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: 1 - 28 Identifier: ISSN: 1553-734X
CoNE: https://pure.mpg.de/cone/journals/resource/1000000000017180_1