Use of local and global geometry from object arrays by adult humans

Behavioural Processes

Volumn 86, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 196-205

  Reichert, James F ^a   Kelly, Debbie M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN   (Canada)

Author keywords

Angles; Global geometry; Humans; Local geometry; Object array

Indexed keywords

GEOMETRY; HUMAN BEHAVIOR; THEORETICAL STUDY;

ADULT; ARTICLE; COGNITION; DISORIENTATION; FEMALE; GEOMETRY; GLOBAL GEOMETRY; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LOCAL GEOMETRY; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; SEX DIFFERENCE; SPATIAL ORIENTATION; TASK PERFORMANCE; TRAINING;

ADULT; CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); CUES; EXPLORATORY BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HUMANS; LEARNING; MALE; ORIENTATION; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PROBLEM SOLVING; REWARD; SEX CHARACTERISTICS; SPACE PERCEPTION; SPATIAL BEHAVIOR; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 79551682567     PISSN: 03766357     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2010.11.008     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Astur R.S., Ortiz M.L., Sutherland R.J. A characterization of performance by men and women in a virtual Morris water task: a large and reliable sex difference. Behavioural Brain Research 1998, 93:185-190.
2. Barlow H.B. General principles: the senses considered as physical instruments. The Senses 1982, 1-33. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. H.B. Barlow, J.D. Mollon (Eds.).
3. Cheng K. A purely geometric module in the rat's spatial representation. Cognition 1986, 23:149-178.
4. Cheng K. Three psychophysical principles in the processing of spatial and temporal information. Cognitive Aspects of Stimulus Control 1992, 69-88. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. W.K. Honig, J.G. Fetterman (Eds.).
5. Cheng K., Newcombe N.S. Is there a geometric module for spatial reorientation? Squaring theory and evidence. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 2005, 12:1-23.
6. Dabbs J.M., Chang E.L., Strong R.A., Milun R. Spatial ability, navigation strategy, and geographical knowledge among men and women. Evolution and Human Behavior 1998, 19:89-98.
7. Doeller C.F., King J.A., Burgess N. Parallel striatal and hippocampal systems for landmarks and boundaries in spatial memory. Journal of Neuroscience 2008, 105:5915-5920.
8. Galea L.A.M., Kimura D. Sex differences in route-learning. Personality and Individual Differences 1993, 14:53-65.
9. Gibson B.M., Wilks T.J., Kelly D.M. Rats (Rattus norvegicus) encode the shape of an array of discrete objects. Journal of Comparative Psychology 2007, 121:130-144.
10. Gouteux S., Spelke E.S. Children's use of geometry and landmarks to reorient in space. Cognition 2001, 81:119-148.
11. Gouteux S., Thinus-Blanc C., Vauclair J. Rhesus monkeys use geometric and nongeometric information during a reorientation task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2001, 130:505-519.
12. Hermer L., Spelke E. A geometric process for spatial representation in young children. Nature 1994, 370:57-59.
13. Hupbach A., Nadel L. Reorientation in a rhombic environment: no evidence for an encapsulated geometric module. Cognitive Development 2005, 20:279-302.
14. Jones P.M., Pearce J.M., Davies V.J., Good M.A., McGregor A. Impaired processing of local geometric features during navigation in a water maze following hippocampal lesions in rats. Behavioural Neuroscience 2007, 121:1258-1271.
15. Kallai J., Makany T., Csatho A., Kazmer K., Horvath D., Kovacs-Labadi B., Jarai R., Nadel L., Jacobs J.W. Cognitive and affective aspects of thigmotaxis strategy in humans. Behavioural Neuroscience 2007, 121:21-30.
16. Kamil A.C., Jones J.E. Geometric rule learning by Clark's nutcrackers (Nucifraga columbiana). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 2000, 26:439-453.
17. Kelly D.M. Features enhance the encoding of geometry. Animal Cognition 2010, 13:453-462.
18. Kelly D.M., Spetch M.L., Heth C.D. Pigeons' encoding of geometric and featural properties of a spatial environment. Journal of Comparative Psychology 1998, 112:259-269.
19. Kelly D.M., Bischof W.F. Reorienting in images of a three-dimensional environment. Journal of Experimental Psychology 2005, 31:1391-1403.
20. Kelly D.M., Bischof W.F. Orienting in virtual environments: how are surface features and environmental geometry weighted in an orientation task?. Cognition 2008, 109:89-104.
21. Lawton C.A. Gender differences in way-finding strategies: relationship to spatial ability and spatial anxiety. Sex Roles 1994, 30:765-779.
22. Lourenco S.F., Huttenlocher J. How do young children determine location? Evidence from disorientation tasks. Cognition 2006, 511-529.
23. MacDonald S.E., Spetch M.L., Kelly D.M., Cheng K. Strategies in landmark use by children, adults, and marmoset monkeys. Learning and Motivation 2004, 35:322-347.
24. MacFadden A., Elias L., Saucier D. Males and females scan maps similarly, but give directions differently. Brain and Cognition 2003, 53:297-300.
25. Ratliff K.R., Newcombe N.S. Is language necessary for human spatial reorientation? Reconsidering evidence from dual task paradigms. Cognitive Psychology 2008, 56:142-163.
26. Sandstrom N.J., Kaufman J., Huettel S.A. Males and females use different distal cues in a virtual environment navigation task. Cognitive Brain Research 1998, 6:351-360.
27. Saucier D., Bowman M., Elias L. Sex differences in the effect of articulatory or spatial dual-task interference during navigation. Brain and Cognition 2003, 53:346-350.
28. Saucier D.M., Green S.M., Leason J., MacFadden A., Bell S., Elias L.J. Are sex differences in navigation caused by sexually dimorphic strategies or by differences in the ability to use the strategies. Behavioural Neuroscience 2002, 116:403-410.
29. Sovrano V.A., Bisazza A., Vallortigara G. Modularity and spatial reorientation in a simple mind: encoding of geometric and nongeometric properties of a spatial environment by fish. Cognition 2002, 85:B51-B59.
30. Spetch M.L., Cheng K., MacDonald S.E., Linkenhoker B.A., Kelly D.M., Doerkson S.R. Use of landmark configuration in pigeons and humans: II. Generality across search tasks. Journal of Comparative Psychology 1997, 111:14-24.
31. Tommasi L., Polli C. Representation of two geometric features of the environment in the domestic chick (Gallus gallus). Animal Cognition 2004, 7:53-59.
32. Twyman A., Friedman A., Spetch M.L. Penetrating the geometric module: catalyzing children's use of landmarks. Developmental Psychology 2007, 43:1523-1530.
33. Vallortigara G., Zanforlin M., Pasti G. Geometric modules in animals' spatial representations: a test with chicks (Gallus gallus domesticus). Journal of Comparative Psychology 1990, 104:248-254.
34. Wystrach A., Beugnon G. Ants learn geometry and features. Current Biology 2009, 19:61-66.