Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Fifty-five participants were tested for their spatial exploration and navigation performances in a square shaped experimental room containing five identical boxes each hiding a visually distinct object. In an initial – unconstrained – exploratory phase during which the participants were asked to learn the positions of the objects, two patterns of spatial exploration emerged: axial explorers utilised main axis, while circular explorers circled around the centre of the space. In the next phase, participants were forced to learn the position of new objects which had been placed in a novel arrangement of the boxes. The participants were only able to explore along a marked route – that either matched or conflicted with their initial exploratory pattern. Finally, participants were required to visit a sequence of objects in an optional order task. The results showed significant differences in navigation efficiencies as a consequence of forced learning. Participants forced to learn via a more cognitively optimal (circular) pattern utilized their acquired spatial knowledge more efficiently than those forced to learn in a cognitively less beneficial pattern (axial). This finding was regardless of the initial exploratory pattern shown by participants.
Citation preview
Objectives
This study investigated the relationship between spatial learning and
subsequent navigation in an indoor environment. Specifically, we
examined whether navigation efficiency could be altered by manipulating
the exploratory strategy utilised.
Methods
Participants
• 55 students from the University of Southampton participated
Materials
• Spatially uniform experimental room
• Room dimensions 3.5 (length) x 3.5 (width) x 2.5 (height) metres
• The room contained five identical boxes with a distinct object
inside each
Procedure
• Phase 1 (“Free exploration”), individual walking patterns were
identified using an automated cluster analysis algorithm as
described in Makany
et al. (2007). These were clustered on
visual similarities
• Two distinct exploratory patterns were identified: Axial &
Circular.
• Makany
et al. (2007) found that distinct exploratory patterns
optimized navigation performance differently. Axial group was
cognitively more efficient, whilst Circulars were physically
efficient. This represented a trade off between distance
travelled and memory demands
• Phase 2 (“Forced Learning”) participants were forced to learn a
similar spatial layout using either a matching or non‐matching
route to their initial exploratory pattern. Yellow carpet tiles
marked allowed paths. Participants were asked to “always
follow this Yellow Brick Road”.
• Phase 3 (“Test”) Yellow Brick Road (YBR) was removed.
Participants were instructed to navigate betweensequences of 3
objects in any order they wished using
the most efficient path. In
total there were 12 trials.
The effects of forced spatial learning:
Should we always stay on the Yellow Brick Road?
Jonathan Pyke, Tamas
Makany, Edward Redhead, & Itiel
Dror
University of Southampton
Figure 7.
Binary Errors (Standard deviation) for
subgroupsFigure 8.
Frequency Errors (Standard deviation) for
subgroups
Figure 6.
Binary visitations (standard deviation) for forced groups
Figure 2.
Axial cluster pattern Figure 3.
Circular cluster pattern
* p<0.05
Figure 4. Forced Circular pattern Figure 5.
Forced Axial Pattern
Figure 1.
Arrangement of Room during Free Exploration
C‐C. Initial Circular, Forced Circular, A‐C. Initial Axial, Forced Circular C‐A. Initial Circular, Forced Axial,
A‐A. Initial Axial , Forced Axial
