Wayfinding is an important skill that is used in many essential daily activities. While some studies have found older adults to have reduced visuospatial functioning and wayfinding performance, the majority of this research has been conducted in laboratory settings and may suffer from threats to external validity. In the current article, we report an empirical study in which 33 participants, grouped into younger adults versus older adults, were asked to find multiple destinations within a complex real-world building. Multiple outcome measures were collected, including wayfinding performance, spatial learning, self-reported uncertainty, and information-seeking behavior. The results indicated that the older adult participants spent longer amounts of time and traveled longer distances to reach the destinations compared to younger adults, with medium-large effect sizes. Older adults also tended to check signs more frequently and to spend more time examining them, with large to very large effect sizes. Spatial learning outcomes and self-reported uncertainty levels in older and younger groups were not significantly different. We discuss recommendations for future studies in this area regarding experimental design, measurement, and interpretation.
AdamoD. E.BriceñoE. M.SindoneJ. A.AlexanderN. B.MoffatS. D. (2012). Age differences in virtual environment and real world path integration. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 4, Article 26. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2012.00026
2.
AndersonE. C.CarletonR. N.DiefenbachM.HanP. K. J. (2019). The relationship between uncertainty and affect. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 2504. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02504
3.
AubreyJ. B.LiK. Z. H.DobbsA. R. (1994). Age differences in the interpretation of misaligned “you-are-here” maps. Journal of Gerontology, 49(1), P29–P31. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/49.1.P29
4.
AustinP. C. (2011). An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46(3), 399–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2011.568786
Bar-AnanY.WilsonT. D.GilbertD. T. (2009). The feeling of uncertainty intensifies affective reactions. Emotion, 9(1), 123–127. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014607
7.
BennettC. R.GiudiceN. A. (2017). Evaluating age-related cognitive map decay using a novel time-delayed testing paradigm. In BarkowskyT.BurteH.HölscherC.SchultheisH. (Eds.), Spatial cognition X (Vol. 10523, pp. 69–85). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68189-4_5
8.
BorellaE.MeneghettiC.MuffatoV.De BeniR. (2015). Map learning and the alignment effect in young and older adults: How do they gain from having a map available while performing pointing tasks?Psychological Research, 79(1), 104–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-014-0543-y
9.
BouazzaouiB.IsingriniM.FayS.AngelL.VannesteS.ClarysD.TaconnatL. (2010). Aging and self-reported internal and external memory strategy uses: The role of executive functioning. Acta Psychologica, 135(1), 59–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.05.007
10.
CaffòA. O.LopezA.SpanoG.StasollaF.SerinoS.CipressoP.RivaG.BoscoA. (2020). The differential effect of normal and pathological aging on egocentric and allocentric spatial memory in navigational and reaching space. Neurological Sciences, 41(7), 1741–1749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-020-04261-4
11.
CaloriC.Vanden-EyndenD. (2015). Signage and wayfinding design: A complete guide to creating environmental graphic design systems (2nd ed.). Wiley.
12.
CarboneE.MeneghettiC.BorellaE. (2021). Supporting route learning in older adults: The role of imagery strategy. Aging & Mental Health, 25(8), 1564–1571. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2020.1727844
13.
CastelliL.Latini CorazziniL.GeminianiG. C. (2008). Spatial navigation in large-scale virtual environments: Gender differences in survey tasks. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1643–1667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2007.06.005
14.
ChebatJ.-C.Gélinas-ChebatC.TherrienK. (2005). Lost in a mall, the effects of gender, familiarity with the shopping mall and the shopping values on shoppers’ wayfinding processes. Journal of Business Research, 58(11), 1590–1598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2004.02.006
15.
CherneyI. D.BrabecC. M.RuncoD. V. (2008). Mapping out spatial ability: Sex differences in way-finding navigation. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 107(3), 747–760. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.107.3.747-760
16.
ChienY. C.TsaiP. A.LinY. T.WuS. M.ChenK. T.HanY. T.HwangP. (2016). Uncertainty and mental workload among wayfinding strategies. In AntonaM.StephanidisC. (Eds.), Universal access in human-computer interaction. Users and context diversity (pp. 556–565). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40238-3_53
17.
ColomboD.SerinoS.TuenaC.PedroliE.DakanalisA.CipressoP.RivaG. (2017). Egocentric and allocentric spatial reference frames in aging: A systematic review. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 80, 605–621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.07.012
18.
CooperR. (2010). Wayfinding for health care: Best practices for today’s facilities (1st ed.). American Hospital Association.
DavisR. L.TherrienB. A.WestB. T. (2008). Cue conditions and wayfinding in older and younger women. Research in Gerontological Nursing, 1(4), 252–263. https://doi.org/10.3928/19404921-20081001-06
21.
DengL.ZhangB.ShiG.ZhangC. (2024). Elderly users’ perceptions of signage systems from tertiary hospitals in Guangzhou. Heliyon, 10(3), Article e25003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e25003
22.
EkstromA. D.HillP. F. (2023). Spatial navigation and memory: A review of the similarities and differences relevant to brain models and age. Neuron, 111(7), 1037–1049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2023.03.001
23.
FarrA. C.KleinschmidtT.YarlagaddaP.MengersenK. (2012). Wayfinding: A simple concept, a complex process. Transport Reviews, 32(6), 715–743. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2012.712555
FinleyJ. R.NaazF.GohF. W. (2018). Results: The interplay between internal and external memory. In FinleyJ. R.NaazF.GohF. W. (Eds.), Memory and technology: How we use information in the brain and the world (pp. 49–72). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99169-6_4
26.
FrickeM.MorawietzC.WunderlichA.MuehlbauerT.JansenC.-P.GramannK.WollesenB. (2022). Successful wayfinding in age: A scoping review on spatial navigation training in healthy older adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 867987. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.867987
27.
GazovaI.LaczóJ.RubinovaE.MokrisovaI.HyncicovaE.AndelR.VyhnalekM.SheardovaK.CoulsonE. J.HortJ. (2013). Spatial navigation in young versus older adults. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 5, Article 94. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2013.00094
28.
GhamariH.SharifiA. (2021). Mapping the evolutions and trends of literature on wayfinding in indoor environments. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 11(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe11020042
29.
GibsonD. (2009). The wayfinding handbook: Information design for public places (1st ed.). Princeton Architectural Press.
30.
HarrisM. A.WolbersT. (2012). Ageing effects on path integration and landmark navigation. Hippocampus, 22(8), 1770–1780. https://doi.org/10.1002/hipo.22011
31.
HarrisM. A.WolbersT. (2014). How age-related strategy switching deficits affect wayfinding in complex environments. Neurobiology of Aging, 35(5), 1095–1102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2013.10.086
HegartyM.RichardsonA. E.MontelloD. R.LovelaceK.SubbiahI. (2002). Development of a self-report measure of environmental spatial ability. Intelligence, 30(5), 425–447. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-2896(02)00116-2
34.
HiltonC.JohnsonA.SlatteryT. J.MielletS.WienerJ. M. (2021). The impact of cognitive aging on route learning rate and the acquisition of landmark knowledge. Cognition, 207, Article 104524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104524
35.
HirshJ. B.MarR. A.PetersonJ. B. (2012). Psychological entropy: A framework for understanding uncertainty-related anxiety. Psychological Review, 119(2), 304–320. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026767
36.
HölscherC.BrösamleM.VrachliotisG. (2012). Challenges in multilevel wayfinding: A case study with the space syntax technique. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 39(1), 63–82. https://doi.org/10.1068/b34050t
37.
HölscherC.BüchnerS. J.MeilingerT.StrubeG. (2009). Adaptivity of wayfinding strategies in a multi-building ensemble: The effects of spatial structure, task requirements, and metric information. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(2), 208–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.05.010
38.
HölscherC.MeilingerT.VrachliotisG.BrösamleM.KnauffM. (2006). Up the down staircase: Wayfinding strategies in multi-level buildings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26(4), 284–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.09.002
39.
HundA. M. (2016). Visuospatial working memory facilitates indoor wayfinding and direction giving. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 45, 233–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.01.008
40.
Intons-PetersonM. J.FournierJ. (1986). External and internal memory aids: When and how often do we use them?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115(3), 267–280. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.115.3.267
41.
IsagerP.ScheelA.LakensD. (2022). Equivalence testing for psychological research: A tutorial. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(2), 259–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918770963
42.
JamshidiS.EnsafiM.PatiD. (2020). Wayfinding in interior environments: An integrative review. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 549628. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.549628
43.
JonietzD.KieferP. (2017). Uncertainty in wayfinding: A conceptual framework and agent-based model. Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics, 86, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.COSIT.2017.15
44.
KellerA. M.TaylorH. A.BrunyéT. T. (2020). Uncertainty promotes information-seeking actions, but what information?Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 5(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-020-00245-2
45.
KirasicK. C. (2000). Age differences in adults’ spatial abilities, learning environmental layout, and wayfinding behavior. Spatial Cognition and Computation, 2(2), 117–134. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011445624332
KizonyR.BahatY.WeissP. L.KizonyR.Baum-CohenI.MintzI.KafriM.KodeshE.ZeiligG.BondiM. (2015). A multi-dimensional approach to evaluate performance of complex daily activities of older adults in a simulated mall [Conference session]. 2015 International Conference on Virtual Rehabilitation (ICVR) (pp. 129–130). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICVR.2015.7358610
48.
KlencklenG.DesprésO.DufourA. (2012). What do we know about aging and spatial cognition? Reviews and perspectives. Ageing Research Reviews, 11(1), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arr.2011.10.001
49.
LawtonC. A. (1994). Gender differences in way-finding strategies: Relationship to spatial ability and spatial anxiety. Sex Roles, 30(11–12), 765–779. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01544230
50.
LeónI.TascónL.CimadevillaJ. M. (2016). Age and gender-related differences in a spatial memory task in humans. Behavioural Brain Research, 306, 8–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2016.03.008
51.
LohrS. L. (2019). Complex surveys. In J. K. Blitzstein, J. J. Faraway, M. Tanner, & J. Zidek (Eds.), Sampling: Design and analysis (2nd ed.). CRC Press.
52.
LokkaI. E.ÇöltekinA. (2020). Perspective switch and spatial knowledge acquisition: Effects of age, mental rotation ability and visuospatial memory capacity on route learning in virtual environments with different levels of realism. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 47(1), 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/15230406.2019.1595151
53.
MarquezD. X.HunterR. H.GriffithM. H.BryantL. L.JanicekS. J.AtherlyA. J. (2017). Older adult strategies for community wayfinding. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 36(2), 213–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/0733464815581481
54.
McAvanA. S.DuY. K.OyaoA.DonerS.GrilliM. D.EkstromA. (2021). Older adults show reduced spatial precision but preserved strategy-use during spatial navigation involving body-based cues. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 13, Article 640188. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2021.640188
55.
McCrearyF. A.BelzS. M. (1999). Age-related differences in navigational performance within an immersive virtual environment. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 43(2), 118–122. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193129904300205
56.
MeadeM.MeadeJ.SauzeonH.FernandesM. (2019). Active navigation in virtual environments benefits spatial memory in older adults. Brain Sciences, 9(3), Article 47. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci9030047
57.
MeneghettiC.FioreF.BorellaE.De BeniR. (2011). Learning a map of environment: The role of visuo-spatial abilities in young and older adults. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(6), 952–959. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1788
MoffatS. D.ZondermanA. B.ResnickS. M. (2001). Age differences in spatial memory in a virtual environment navigation task. Neurobiology of Aging, 22(5), 787–796. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0197-4580(01)00251-2
60.
NasreddineZ. S.PhillipsN. A.BédirianV.CharbonneauS.WhiteheadV.CollinI.CummingsJ. L.ChertkowH. (2005). The montreal cognitive assessment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53(4), 695–699. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x
61.
OttinkL.HoogendonkM.DoellerC. F.Van der GeestT. M.Van WezelR. J. A. (2021). Cognitive map formation through haptic and visual exploration of tactile city-like maps. Scientific Reports, 11(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-94778-1
PerrochonA.MandigoutS.PetruzzellisS.Soria GarciaN.ZaouiM.BerthozA.DavietJ. C. (2018). The influence of age in women in visuo-spatial memory in reaching and navigation tasks with and without landmarks. Neuroscience Letters, 684, 13–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2018.06.054
64.
PetersM.LaengB.LathamK.JacksonM.ZaiyounaR.RichardsonC. (1995). A redrawn vandenberg and kuse mental rotations test—Different versions and factors that affect performance. Brain and Cognition, 28(1), 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1006/brcg.1995.1032
65.
PhillipsJ.WalfordN.HockeyA.ForemanN.LewisM. (2013). Older people and outdoor environments: Pedestrian anxieties and barriers in the use of familiar and unfamiliar spaces. Geoforum, 47, 113–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2013.04.002
66.
PizzoniaK. L.SuhrJ. A. (2022). Systematic review of correlates of internal and external memory strategy use in older adults. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 41(5), 1491–1499. https://doi.org/10.1177/07334648211065427
67.
RamanoëlS.DurtesteM.BécuM.HabasC.ArleoA. (2020). Differential brain activity in regions linked to visuospatial processing during landmark-based navigation in young and healthy older adults. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 14, Article 552111. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.552111
68.
RaubalM.EgenhoferM. J. (1998). Comparing the complexity of wayfinding tasks in built environments. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 25(6), 895–913. https://doi.org/10.1068/b250895
SäljöR. (2012). Literacy, digital literacy and epistemic practices: The co-evolution of hybrid minds and external memory systems. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 7(1), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1891-943X-2012-01-02
71.
SchmitzS. (1999). Gender differences in acquisition of environmental knowledge related to wayfinding behavior, spatial anxiety and self-estimated environmental competencies. Sex Roles, 41(1), 71–93. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018837808724
72.
ShihW. J. (2002). Problems in dealing with missing data and informative censoring in clinical trials. Current Controlled Trials in Cardiovascular Medicine, 3(1), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/1468-6708-3-4
73.
SiegelA. W.KrasicK. C.KailR. V. (1978). Stalking the elusive cognitive map. In AltmanI.WohlwillJ. F. (Eds.), Children and the environment (pp. 223–258). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-3405-7_7
74.
SiegelA. W.WhiteS. H. (1975). The development of spatial representations of large-scale environments. In ReeseH. W. (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 10, pp. 9–55). JAI. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2407(08)60007-5
75.
SjölinderM.HöökK.NilssonL.-G.AnderssonG. (2005). Age differences and the acquisition of spatial knowledge in a three-dimensional environment: Evaluating the use of an overview map as a navigation aid. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 63(6), 537–564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.04.024
76.
TailladeM.N’KaouaB.SauzéonH. (2016). Age-related differences and cognitive correlates of self-reported and direct navigation performance: The effect of real and virtual test conditions manipulation. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 2034. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.02034
77.
TempletonA. J.AmirE.TannockI. F. (2020). Informative censoring—A neglected cause of bias in oncology trials. Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology, 17(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41571-020-0368-0
78.
ThoemmesF. J.KimE. S. (2011). A systematic review of propensity score methods in the social sciences. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46(1), 90–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2011.540475
VandenbergS. G.KuseA. R. (1978). Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47(2), 599–604. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1978.47.2.599
81.
van der HamI. J. M.ClaessenM. H. G. (2020). How age relates to spatial navigation performance: Functional and methodological considerations. Ageing Research Reviews, 58, Article 101020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arr.2020.101020
82.
VerhaeghenP.SalthouseT. (1997). Meta-analyses of age-cognition relations in adulthood: Estimates of linear and nonlinear age effects and structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 231–249. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.122.3.231
83.
WangC.ChenY.ZhengS.LiaoH. (2018). Gender and age differences in using indoor maps for wayfinding in real environments. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 8(1), Article 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi8010011
84.
WienerJ. M.BüchnerS. J.HölscherC. (2009). Taxonomy of human wayfinding tasks: A knowledge-based approach. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 9(2), 152–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/13875860902906496
85.
WilknissS. M.JonesM. G.KorolD. L.GoldP. E.ManningC. A. (1997). Age-related differences in an ecologically based study of route learning. Psychology and Aging, 12(2), 372–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.12.2.372
86.
YangQ.KalantariS. (2024). Real-time continuous perceived uncertainty annotation for spatial navigation studies in buildings. Journal of Building Engineering, 82, Article 108250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2023.108250
87.
ZhangJ.-X.WangL.HouH.-Y.YueC.-L.WangL.LiH.-J. (2021). Age-related impairment of navigation and strategy in virtual star maze. BMC Geriatrics, 21(1), Article 108. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-021-02034-y
88.
ZhuB.Cruz-GarzaJ. G.YangQ.ShoaranM.KalantariS. (2022). Identifying uncertainty states during wayfinding in indoor environments: An EEG classification study. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 54, Article 101718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2022.101718
