Accumulating evidence suggests that distinct aspects of successful navigation—path integration, spatial-knowledge acquisition, and navigation strategies—change with advanced age. Yet few studies have established whether navigation deficits emerge early in the aging process (prior to age 65) or whether early age-related deficits vary by sex. Here, we probed healthy young adults (ages 18–28) and midlife adults (ages 43–61) on three essential aspects of navigation. We found, first, that path-integration ability shows negligible effects of sex or age. Second, robust sex differences in spatial-knowledge acquisition are observed not only in young adulthood but also, although with diminished effect, at midlife. Third, by midlife, men and women show decreased ability to acquire spatial knowledge and increased reliance on taking habitual paths. Together, our findings indicate that age-related changes in navigation ability and strategy are evident as early as midlife and that path-integration ability is spared, to some extent, in the transition from youth to middle age.
AdamoD. E.BriceñoE. M.SindoneJ. A.AlexanderN. B.MoffatS. (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.
AllenG. L.KirasicK. C.RashotteM. A.HaunD. B. M. (2004). Aging and path integration skill: Kinesthetic and vestibular contributions to wayfinding. Perception & Psychophysics, 66(1), 170–179. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194870
3.
BooneA. P.GongX.HegartyM. (2018). Sex differences in navigation strategy and efficiency. Memory & Cognition, 46(6), 909–922. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-018-0811-y
4.
BooneA. P.MaghenB.HegartyM. (2019). Instructions matter: Individual differences in navigation strategy and ability. Memory & Cognition, 47(7), 1401–1414. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00941-5
5.
ChrastilE. R. (2013). Neural evidence supports a novel framework for spatial navigation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(2), 208–227. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0351-6
6.
ChrastilE. R.NicoraG. L.HuangA. (2019). Vision and proprioception make equal contributions to path integration in a novel homing task. Cognition, 192, Article 103998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.06.010
7.
ChrastilE. R.WarrenW. H. (2013). Active and passive spatial learning in human navigation: Acquisition of survey knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(5), 1520–1537. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032382
ChrastilE. R.WarrenW. H. (2015). Active and passive spatial learning in human navigation: Acquisition of graph knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(4), 1162–1178. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000082
10.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.
11.
ColucciaE.LouseG. (2004). Gender differences in spatial orientation: A review. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(3), 329–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.08.006
12.
CoughlanG.CoutrotA.KhondokerM.MinihaneA.-M.SpiersH. J.HornbergerM. (2018). Impact of sex and APOE status on spatial navigation in pre-symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease. BioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/287722
CourvoisierD. S.RenaudO.GeiserC.PaschkeK.GaudyK.JordanK. (2013). Sex hormones and mental rotation: An intensive longitudinal investigation. Hormones and Behavior, 63(2), 345–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2012.12.007
15.
CoutrotA.SchmidtS.CoutrotL.PittmanJ.HongL.WienerJ. M.HölscherC.DaltonR. C.HornbergerM.SpiersH. J. (2019). Virtual navigation tested on a mobile app is predictive of real-world wayfinding navigation performance. PLOS ONE, 14(3), Article e0213272. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0213272
16.
DriscollI.HamiltonD. A.YeoR. A.BrooksW. M.SutherlandR. J. (2005). Virtual navigation in humans: The impact of age, sex, and hormones on place learning. Hormones and Behavior, 47(3), 326–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2004.11.013
17.
FeldmanH. A.LongcopeC.DerbyC. A.JohannesC. B.AraujoA. B.CovielloA. D.BremnerW. J.McKinlayJ. B. (2002). Age trends in the level of serum testosterone and other hormones in middle-aged men: Longitudinal results from the Massachusetts Male Aging Study. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 87(2), 589–598. https://doi.org/10.1210/jcem.87.2.8201
18.
GagnonK. T.CashdanE. A.StefanucciJ. K.Creem-RegehrS. H. (2016). Sex differences in exploration behavior and the relationship to harm avoidance. Human Nature, 27(1), 82–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-015-9248-1
19.
GolledgeR. G. (1999). Wayfinding behavior: Cognitive mapping and other spatial processes. Johns Hopkins University Press.
20.
HaraY.ParkC. S.JanssenW. G. M.RobertsM. T.MorrisonJ. H.RappP. R. (2012). Synaptic correlates of memory and menopause in the hippocampal dentate gyrus in rhesus monkeys. Neurobiology of Aging, 33(2), 421.e17–421.e28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2010.09.014
21.
HarrisM. A.WienerJ. M.WolbersT. (2012). Aging specifically impairs switching to an allocentric navigational strategy. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 4, Article 29. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2012.00029
22.
HarrisM. A.WolbersT. (2012). Ageing effects on path integration and landmark navigation. Hippocampus, 22(8), 1770–1780. https://doi.org/10.1002/hipo.22011
23.
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
24.
HebertL. E.WeuveJ.ScherrP. A.EvansD. A. (2013). Alzheimer disease in the United States (2010–2050) estimated using the 2010 census. Neurology, 80(19), 1778–1783. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e31828726f5
25.
HegartyM.MontelloD. R.RichardsonA. E.IshikawaT.LovelaceK. (2006). Spatial abilities at different scales: Individual differences in aptitude-test performance and spatial-layout learning. Intelligence, 34(2), 151–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2005.09.005
26.
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
27.
HussainD.HanafiS.KonishiK.BrakeW. G.BohbotV. D. (2016). Modulation of spatial and response strategies by phase of the menstrual cycle in women tested in a virtual navigation task. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 70, 108–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2016.05.008
28.
IshikawaT.MontelloD. R. (2006). Spatial knowledge acquisition from direct experience in the environment: Individual differences in the development of metric knowledge and the integration of separately learned places. Cognitive Psychology, 52(2), 93–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2005.08.003
29.
JacobsE. G.GoldsteinJ. M. (2018). The middle-aged brain: Biological sex and sex hormones shape memory circuitry. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 23, 84–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.03.009
30.
KorolD. L.MalinE. L.BordenK. A.BusbyR. A.Couper-LeoJ. (2004). Shifts in preferred learning strategy across the estrous cycle in female rats. Hormones and Behavior, 45(5), 330–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2004.01.005
31.
KunzL.SchröderT. N.LeeH.MontagC.LachmannB.SariyskaR.ReuterM.StirnbergR.StöckerT.Messing-FloeterP. C.FellJ.DoellerC. F.AxmacherN. (2015). Reduced grid-cell–like representations in adults at genetic risk for Alzheimer’s disease. Science, 350(6259), 430–433. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac8128
LoomisJ. M.KlatzkyR. L.GolledgeR. G.CicinelliJ. G.PellegrinoJ. W.FryP. A. (1993). Nonvisual navigation by blind and sighted: Assessment of path integration ability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(1), 73–91. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.122.1.73
34.
MarchetteS. A.BakkerA.SheltonA. L. (2011). Cognitive mappers to creatures of habit: Differential engagement of place and response learning mechanisms predicts human navigational behavior. The Journal of Neuroscience, 31(43), 15264–15268. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3634-11.2011
35.
MerhavM.WolbersT. (2019). Aging and spatial cues influence the updating of navigational memories. Scientific Reports, 9, Article 11469. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-47971-2
36.
MielkeM. M.VemuriP.RoccaW. A. (2014). Clinical epidemiology of Alzheimer’s disease: Assessing sex and gender differences. Clinical Epidemiology, 6, 37–48. https://doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S37929
37.
MittelstaedtM.-L.MittelstaedtH. (1980). Homing by path integration in a mammal. Naturwissenschaften, 67(11), 566–567. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00450672
38.
MoffatS. D. (2005). Effects of testosterone on cognitive and brain aging in elderly men. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1055(1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1323.014
39.
MoffatS. D. (2009). Aging and spatial navigation: What do we know and where do we go?Neuropsychology Review, 19, Article 478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-009-9120-3
40.
MoffatS. D.HampsonE.HatzipantelisM. (1998). Navigation in a “virtual” maze: Sex differences and correlation with psychometric measures of spatial ability in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 19(2), 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(97)00104-9
41.
MontelloD. R.LovelaceK. L.GolledgeR. G.SelfC. M. (1999). Sex-related differences and similarities in geographic and environmental spatial abilities. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 89(3), 515–534. https://doi.org/10.1111/0004-5608.00160
42.
NazarethA.HuangX.VoyerD.NewcombeN. (2019). A meta-analysis of sex differences in human navigation skills. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 26(5), 1503–1528. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01633-6
43.
StanglM.AchtzehnJ.HuberK.DietrichC.TempelmannC.WolbersT. (2018). Compromised grid-cell-like representations in old age as a key mechanism to explain age-related navigational deficits. Current Biology, 28(7), 1108–1115.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2018.02.038
44.
TaylorC. M.PritschetL.OlsenR. K.LayherE.SantanderT.GraftonS. T.JacobsE. G. (2020). Progesterone shapes medial temporal lobe volume across the human menstrual cycle. NeuroImage, 220, Article 117125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117125
45.
WallerD. (2000). Individual differences in spatial learning from computer-simulated environments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6(4), 307–321. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.6.4.307
46.
WeisbergS. M.NewcombeN. S. (2016). How do (some) people make a cognitive map? Routes, places, and working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(5), 768–785. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000200
47.
WienerJ. M.de CondappaO.HarrisM. A.WolbersT. (2013). Maladaptive bias for extrahippocampal navigation strategies in aging humans. The Journal of Neuroscience, 33(14), 6012–6017. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0717-12.2013
ZhongJ. Y.MoffatS. D. (2016). Age-related differences in associative learning of landmarks and heading directions in a virtual navigation task. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 8, Article 122. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2016.00122
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
