Abstract
Spatial navigation in the mammalian brain relies on a cognitive map of the environment. Such cognitive maps enable us, for example, to take the optimal route from a given location to a known target. The formation of these maps is naturally influenced by our perception of the environment, meaning it is dependent on factors such as our viewpoint and choice of reference frame. Yet, it is unknown how these factors influence the construction of cognitive maps. Here, we evaluated how various combinations of viewpoints and reference frames affect subjects' performance when they navigated in a bounded virtual environment without landmarks. We measured both their path length and time efficiency and found that (1) ground perspective was associated with egocentric frame of reference, (2) aerial perspective was associated with allocentric frame of reference, (3) there was no appreciable performance difference between first and third person egocentric viewing positions and (4) while none of these effects were dependent on gender, males tended to perform better in general. Our study provides evidence that there are inherent associations between visual perspectives and cognitive reference frames. This result has implications about the mechanisms of path integration in the human brain and may also inspire designs of virtual reality applications. Lastly, we demonstrated the effective use of a tablet PC and spatial navigation tasks for studying spatial and cognitive aspects of human memory.
Highlights
Following Tolman’s seminal work, it has been widely assumed that mammalian spatial navigation relies on cognitive maps (Tolman, 1948)
A paired sample t-test showed no significant www.frontiersin.org difference [t(1, 49) = 0.2802, p = 0.7805, Confidence interval: 5.8079, −4.3867]. This suggests that the 3rd person egocentric camera mode (3P-E) point of view is no better or worse for virtual navigation than the natural 1st person, egocentric perspective
In the present study we examined the effect of viewpoint perspectives and frames of reference on performance in a virtual navigation task
Summary
Following Tolman’s seminal work, it has been widely assumed that mammalian spatial navigation relies on cognitive maps (Tolman, 1948). Continuous spatial information can be inferred from optic flow in a number of ways, from first person to an infinite number of external virtual “camera” positions, even if those camera positions are disjoined from the object the participant needs to navigate. Amongst these innumerable options, the type of sensory projection most effective at supporting spatial navigation is still uncertain (McCormick et al, 1998). This question is a matter choosing the effective “camera angle,” and the effective cognitive frame of reference
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
