Abstract

Keeping track of unseen objects is an important spatial skill. In order to do this, people must situate the object in terms of different frames of reference, including body position (egocentric frame of reference), landmarks in the surrounding environment (extrinsic frame reference), or other attached features (intrinsic frame of reference). Nardini et al. hid a toy in one of 12 cups in front of children, turned the array when they were not looking, and then asked them to point to the cup with the toy. This forced children to use the intrinsic frame (information about the array of cups) to locate the hidden toy. Three-year-olds made systematic errors by using the wrong frame of reference, 4-year-olds were at chance, and only 5- and 6-year-olds were successful. Can we better understand the developmental change that takes place at four years? This paper uses a modelling approach to re-examine the data and distinguish three possible strategies that could lead to the previous results at four years: (1) Children were choosing cups randomly, (2) Children were pointing between the egocentric/extrinsic-cued location and the correct target, and (3) Children were pointing near the egocentric/extrinsic-cued location on some trials and near the target on the rest. Results heavily favor the last possibility: 4-year-olds were not just guessing or trying to combine the available frames of reference. They were using the intrinsic frame on some trials, but not doing so consistently. These insights suggest that accounts of improving spatial performance at 4 years need to explain why there is a mixture of responses. Further application of the selected model also suggests that children become both more reliant on the correct frame and more accurate with any chosen frame as they mature.

Highlights

  • In order to move around the world, people must use different frames of reference

  • Can we better understand the developmental change that takes place at four years? This paper uses a modelling approach to re-examine the data and distinguish three possible strategies that could lead to the previous results at four years: (1) Children were choosing cups randomly, (2) Children were pointing between the egocentric/extrinsic-cued location and the correct target, and (3) Children were pointing near the egocentric/extrinsic-cued location on some trials and near the target on the rest

  • The posterior for the Cue Mixing model is the most directly sensible. It has a strong concentration at w = .5, where it strongly predicts the original result, though the Cue Combination model has some posterior density there as well

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In order to move around the world, people must use different frames of reference. Different tasks or circumstances require specific frames. Children must learn to use the correct frame of reference for the various types of circumstances they encounter. The present study is a new look at the data from Nardini, Breckenridge, Burgess & Atkinson [1] focusing on how the use of intrinsic spatial representations emerges in direct search tasks. Previous analyses showed that average error when a 4-year-old must only use the intrinsic frame is about what is expected from just guessing. The present paper applies a modelling approach to the existing

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call