Dissecting the geometric module a sense linkage for metric and landmark information in animals' spatial reorientation

Psychological Science

Volumn 17, Issue 7, 2006, Pages 616-621

  Sovrano, Valeria Anna ^a   Vallortigara, Giorgio ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TRIESTE   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ATTENTION; CHICKEN; DEPTH PERCEPTION; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; REVIEW; VISION;

ANIMALS; ATTENTION; CHICKENS; FORM PERCEPTION; MALE; SPACE PERCEPTION; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 33745610873     PISSN: 09567976     EISSN: 14679280     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01753.x     Document Type: Review

References (29)

1. Cheng, K. (1986). A purely geometric module in the rat's spatial representation. Cognition, 23, 149-178.
2. Cheng, K., & Newcombe, N.S. (2005). Is there a geometric module for spatial orientation? Squaring theory and evidence. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 1-23.
3. Deipolyi, A., Santos, L., & Hauser, M.D. (2001). The role of landmarks in cotton-top tamarin spatial foraging: Evidence for geometric and non-geometric features. Animal Cognition, 4, 99-108.
4. Gouteux, S., Thinus-Blanc, C., & Vauclair, J. (2001). Rhesus monkeys use geometric and nongeometric information during a reorientation task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 505-519.
5. Hebb, D.O. (1938). Studies of the organization of behaviour: I. Behaviour of the rat in a field orientation. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 25, 333-352.
6. Hermer, L., & Spelke, E.S. (1994). A geometric process for spatial reorientation in young children. Nature, 370, 57-59.
7. Hermer, L., & Spelke, E.S. (1996). Modularity and development: The case of spatial reorientation. Cognition, 61, 195-232.
8. Kelly, D.M., Spetch, M.L., & Heth, C.D. (1998). Pigeons' (Columba livia) encoding of geometric and featural properties of a spatial environment. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 112, 259-269.
9. Learmonth, A.E., Nadel, L., & Newcombe, N.S. (2002). Children's use of landmarks: Implications for modularity theory. Psychological Science, 13, 337-341.
10. Learmonth, A.E., Newcombe, N.S., & Huttenlocher, J. (2001). Toddlers' use of metric information and landmarks to reorient. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 80, 225-244.
11. Nadel, L., & Hupbach, A. (in press). Cross-species comparisons in development: The case of the spatial "module." In M.H. Johnson & Y. Munakata (Eds.), Attention and performance XXI. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
12. O'Keefe, J., & Nadel, L. (1978). The hippocampus as a cognitive map. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
13. Pearce, J.M., Good, M.A., Jones, P.M., & McGregor, A. (2004). Transfer of spatial behaviour between different environments; Implications for theories of spatial learning and for the role of the hippocampus in spatial learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology; Animal Behavior Processes, 30,135-147.
14. Sovrano, V.A., Bisazza, A., & Vallortigara, G. (2002). Modularity and spatial reorientation in a simple mind: Encoding of geometric and nongeometric properties of a spatial environment by fish. Cognition, 85, B51-B59.
15. Sovrano, V.A., Bisam, A., & Vallortigara, C. (2003). Modularity as a fish views it: Conjoining geometric and nongeometric information for spatial reorientation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 29, 199-210.
16. Sovrano, V.A., Bisazza, A., & Vallortigara, G. (2005). Animals' use of landmarks and metric information to reorient: Effects of the size of the experimental space. Cognition, 97, 121-133.
17. Spelke, E.S. (2000). Core knowledge. American Psychologist, 55, 1233-1243.
18. Spelke, E.S. (2003). What makes us smart: Core knowledge and natural language. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), language in mind: Advances in the, study of language and thought (pp. 277-311). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19. Spelke, E.S., & Tsivkin, S. (2001). Initial knowledge and conceptual change: Space and number. In M. Bowerman & S. Levinson (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 70-81). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
20. Vallortigara, G. (2004). Visual cognition and representation in birds and primates. In L.J. Rogers & G. Kaplan (Eds.), Vertebrate comparative cognition: Are primates superior to non-primates? (pp. 5794). Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
21. Vallortigara, G. (2006). The cognitive chicken: Visual and spatial cognition in a non-mammalian brain. In E.A. Wasserman & T.R. Zentall (Eds.), Comparative cognition: Experimental explorations of animal intelligence (pp. 41-58). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
22. Vallortigara, G., Feruglio, M., & Sovrano, V. A. (2005). Reorientation by geometric and landmark information in environments of different size. Developmental Science, 8, 393-401.
23. Vallortigara, G., Pagni, P., & Sovrano, V.A. (2004). Separate geometric and non-geometric modules for spatial reorientation: Evidence from a lopsided animal brain. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 390-400.
24. Vallortigara, G., & Sovrano, V.A. (2002). Conjoining information from different modules: A comparative perspective. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25, 701-702.
25. Vallortigara, G., Zanforlin, M., & Pasti, G. (1990). Geometric modules in animals' spatial representation: A test with chicks. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 104, 248-254.
26. Vargas, J.P., Lopez, J.C., Salas, C., & Thinus-Blanc, C. (2004). Encoding of geometric and featural spatial information by goldfish (Carassius auratus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 118, 206-216.
27. Vargas, J.P., Petruso, E.J., & Bingman, V.P. (2004). Hippocampal formation is required for geometric navigation in pigeons. European Journal of Neuroscience, 20, 1937-1944.
28. Wang, R.F., & Spelke, E.S. (2002). Human spatial representation: Insights from animals. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 376-382.
29. Zugaro, M.B., Arleo, A., Dejean, C., Burguiere, E., Kharnassi, M., & Wiener, S.I. (2004). Rat anterodorsal thalamic head direction neurons depend upon dynamic visual signals to select anchoring landmark cues. European Journal of Neuroscience, 20, 530-536.