This study aimed to investigate the influence of the spatial structure of virtual environments on the mental representation that people form. Three groups of participants visited the locations of several objects in simulated environments that differed in aspects of their structure. After learning, the objects were removed, and participants were required to estimate their former positions in terms of angle of orientation and straight-line distances. Results indicated that the structure of the environment influences performance and suggested the use of different underlying mental representations: If the spatial structure does not obscure direct perception between locations, a procedural type of spatial representation may be sufficient; however, if the spatial structure prevents direct perception between locations, it is likely that people need to elaborate a configurational type of spatial representation. These results stress the importance of spatial structure in the acquisition and use of mental representations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anooshian, L. J. (1988). Places versus procedures in spatial cognition: Alternative approaches to defining and remembering landmarks. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 6, 389-390.
2.
Baird, J. C. (1970). Psychophysical analysis of visual space. New York: Pergamon.
3.
Canter, D. , & Tagg, S. K. (1975). Distance estimations in cities. Environment and Behavior, 7, 59-80.
4.
Gaunet, F. , & Thinus-Blanc, C. (1996). Early blind subjects’ spatial abilities in the locomotor space: Exploratory strategies and reaction-to-change performance. Perception, 25, 967-981.
5.
Goldin, S. E. , & Thorndyke, P. W. (1982). Simulating navigation for spatial knowledge acquisition. Human Factors, 24, 457-471.
6.
Golledge, R. G. (1987). Environmental cognition. In D. Stockols & I. Altman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 131-174). New York: John Wiley.
7.
Hermer, L. , & Spelke, E. (1996). Modularity and development: The case of spatial reorientation. Cognition, 61, 195-232.
8.
Jacobs, W. J. , Laurance, H. E., & Thomas, K.G.F. (1997). Place learning in virtual space I: Acquisition, overshadowing, and transfer. Learning and Motivation, 28, 521-541.
9.
Kosslyn, S. M. , Pick, H. L., & Fariello, G. R. (1974). Cognitive maps in children and men. Child Development, 45, 707-716.
10.
Loomis, J. M. , Klatzky, R. L., Golledge, R. G., Cicinelli, J. G., Pellegrino, J. W., & Fry, P. A. (1993). Nonvisual navigation by blind and sighted: Assessment of path integration ability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 73-91.
11.
Montello, D. R. (1991). The measurement of cognitive distance: Methods and construct validity. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11, 101-122.
12.
Montello, D. R. (1997). The perception and cognition of environmental distance: Direct sources of information. In S. C. Hirtle & A. U. Franck (Eds.), Spatial information theory. A theoretical basis for GIS (pp. 297-311). New York/Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
13.
Morris, R.G.M. (1981). Spatial localization does not require the presence of local cues. Learning and Motivation, 12, 239-260.
14.
Newcombe, N. , & Liben, L. S. (1982). Barrier effects in the cognitive maps of children and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 34, 46-58.
15.
Péruch, P. , & Gaunet, F. (1998). Virtual environments as a promising tool for investigating human spatial cognition. Current Psychology of Cognition, 17, 881-899.
16.
Péruch, P. , Gaunet, F., Thinus-Blanc, C., & Giraudo, M. D. (1995). Encoding of spatial information during navigation in a visually simulated environment. In B. G. Bardy, R. J. Bootsma, & Y. Guiard (Eds.), Studies in perception and action III (pp. 351-354). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17.
Péruch, P. , Vercher, J., & Gauthier, G. M. (1995). Acquisition of spatial knowledge through visual exploration of simulated environments. Ecological Psychology, 7, 1-20.
18.
Pick, H. L. , & Lockman, J. J. (1981). From frames of reference to spatial representations. In L. S. Liben, A. H., Patterson, & N. Newcombe (Eds.), Spatial representation and behavior across the life span (pp. 39-61). San Diego: Academic Press.
19.
Presson, C. C. , & Montello, D. R. (1994). Updating after rotational body movements: Coordinate structure of perspective space. Perception, 23, 1447-1455.
20.
Sandstrom, N. J. , Kaufman, J., & Huettel, S. A. (1998). Males and females use different distal cues in a virtual environment navigation task. Cognitive Brain Research, 6, 351-360.
21.
Shemyakin, F. N. (1962). General problems of orientation in space and space representations. In B. G. Ananyevet al. (Eds.), Psychological science in the USSR (NTIS N TT62-11083) (Vol. 1, Part 1, pp. 186-255). Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Technical Reports.
22.
Siegel, A. , & White, S. (1975). The development of spatial representations of large-scale environments. In H. W. Reese (Eds.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 10, pp. 9-55). San Diego: Academic Press.
23.
Wilson, P. N. (1997). Use of virtual reality computing in spatial learning research. In N. Foreman & R. Gillett (Eds.), A handbook of spatial paradigms and methodologies. Vol. 1: Spatial cognition in the child and adult (pp. 181-206). Howe, UK: Psychology Press.
