Gender differences in landmark learning for virtual navigation: The role of distance to a goal

Behavioural Processes

Volumn 88, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 20-26

  Chamizo, V D ^a   Artigas, A A ^a   Sansa, J ^a   Banterla, F ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BARCELONA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF THE BASQUE COUNTRY UPV EHU   (Spain)

Author keywords

Configural learning; Elemental learning; Landmark learning; Sex or gender differences; Virtual navigation

Indexed keywords

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; LEARNING; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; PSYCHOLOGY; SEX-RELATED DIFFERENCE; STUDENT; TRAINING; VIRTUAL REALITY;

ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEARNING; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; SEX DIFFERENCE; STUDENT; TASK PERFORMANCE; TRAINING; VIRTUAL REALITY;

AUDITORY PERCEPTION; CUES; ESCAPE REACTION; FEEDBACK, PSYCHOLOGICAL; FEMALE; GOALS; HUMANS; LEARNING; MALE; ORIENTATION; SEX CHARACTERISTICS; SPACE PERCEPTION; SPATIAL BEHAVIOR; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 80051588688     PISSN: 03766357     EISSN: 18728308     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2011.06.007     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Artigas A.A., Aznar-Casanova J.A., Chamizo V.D. Effects of absolute proximity between landmark and platform in a virtual Morris pool task with humans. International Journal of Comparative Psychology 2005, 18:224-238.
2. 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.
3. Barkley C.L., Gabriel K.I. Sex differences in cue perception in a visual scene: investigation of cue type. Behavioral Neuroscience 2007, 121:291-300.
4. Beinhoff U., Tumani H., Brettschneider J., Bittner D., Riepe M.W. Gender-specificities in Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment. Journal of Neurology 2008, 255:117-122.
5. Burkitt J., Widman D., Saucier D.E. Evidence for the influence of testosterone in the performance of spatial navigation in a virtual water maze in women but not in men. Hormones and Behavior 2007, 51:649-654.
6. Chai X.J., Jacobs L.F. Sex differences in directional cue use in a virtual landscape. Behavioral Neuroscience 2009, 123:276-283.
7. Chamizo V.D., Aznar-Casanova J.A., Artigas A.A. Human overshadowing in a virtual pool: simple guidance is a good competitor against locale learning. Learning and Motivation 2003, 34:262-281.
8. Choi J., Silverman I. Processes underlying sex differences in route-learning strategies in children and adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences 2003, 34:1153-1166.
9. Coluccia E., Louse G. Gender differences in spatial orientation: a review. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2004, 24:329-340.
10. Dabbs J.M., Chang E.L., Strong R.A., Milun R. Spatial ability, navigation strategy, and geographic knowledge among men and women. Evolution and Human Behavior 1998, 19:89-98.
11. Galea L.A.M., Kimura D. Sex differences in route learning. Personality and Individual Differences 1993, 14:53-65.
12. Halpern D.F. Sex Differences in Cognitive Abilities 2000, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahway, NJ. 3rd ed.
13. Jacobs L.F., Schenk F. Unpacking the cognitive map: the parallel map model of hippocampal function. Psychological Review 2003, 110:285-315.
14. Kamil A.C., Cheng K. Way-finding and landmarks: the multiple-bearing hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Biology 2001, 2043:103-113.
15. Kimura D. Sex and Cognition 1999, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
16. Mackintosh N.J. The Psychology of Animal Learning 1974, Academic Press, London.
17. Mackintosh N.J. IQ and Human Intelligence 2011, Oxford University Press, Oxford. 2nd ed.
18. Morris R.G.M. Spatial localization does not require the presence of local cues. Learning and Motivation 1981, 12:239-260.
19. Pearce J.M. Similarity and discrimination: A selective review and a connectionist model. Psychological Review 1994, 101:587-607.
20. Rescorla R.A., Wagner A.R. A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: variations in the efectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. Classical Conditioning II: current research and theory 1972, 64-99. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, U.S.A. A.H. Black, W.F. Prokasy (Eds.).
21. O'Keefe J., Nadel L. The Hippocampus as a Cognitive Map 1978.
22. Sanders G., Madden A., Thorpe G. Task selection is critical for the demonstration of reciprocal patterns of sex differences in hand/arm motor control and near/far visual processing. Evolutionary Psychology 2008, 6:342-364.
23. Sandstrom N.J., Kaufman J., Huettel S.A. Men and women use different distal cues in a virtual environment navigation task. Cognitive Brain Research 1998, 6:351-360.
24. 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?. Behavioral Neuroscience 2002, 116:403-410.
25. Stancey H., Turner M. Close women, distant men: line bisection reveals sex-dimorphic patterns of visuomotor performance in near and far space. British Journal of Psychology 2010, 101:293-309.