Spatial learning and spatial behavior have been major topics of interest since the early days of psychology, and undoubtedly helped to establish experimental psychology on solid scientiWc foundations. Over the last 30 years or so, psychology has seen the emergence of “spatial cognition” as a new domain in its own right, intended to account for spatial behavior in terms of underlying mechanisms and the associated representations (e.g., Siegel & White, 1975). At the same time, the emphasis on the cognitive determinants of spatial behavior has led to their inclusion in more general theoretical accounts of human cognition, including its architecture and computational mechanisms. Not surprisingly, the increased interest of psychologists in spatial cognition has paralleled the development of behavioral geography, i.e., the part of human geography intended to explain how the behavior of individuals and populations within geographic space is determined by their cognitive representations (e.g., Downs & Stea, 1973; Moore & Golledge, 1976). Over the same period of time, the connections between psychology and other cognitive sciences, such as linguistics and computer science, have led scientists towards new frontiers in the study of the capacities of human and artiWcial cognitive systems. The representation of spatial knowledge has become a primary task for computer scientists, and a number of original works have set out to integrate theories, empirical studies, and formal models of spatial cognition (e.g., Freksa, Brauer, Habel, & Wender, 2000). Two important inXuences on contemporary human spatial cognition research originate from studies of the spatial behavior of non-human species. The Wrst of these is the elegant behavioral research carried out by ethologists and psychologists, which has characterized the exquisite capacities of many species for navigation and cognitive mapping, and has provided superb experimental paradigms for elucidating the mechanisms underlying these capacities (e.g., Cartwright & Collett, 1983; Mittelstaedt & Mittelstaedt, 1980; Thinus-Blanc, 1996; Tolman, 1948; Wehner & Wehner, 1986). The second important inXuence has been the discovery of place cells and head direction cells in the rat (O’Keefe & Dostrovsky, 1971; Taube, Muller, & Ranck, 1990). Besides revealing a surprising degree of sensory, motor, and memorial integration driving the activity of single neurons, the discovery of place and head direction cells has led to new theories about the mechanisms involved in navigation and cognitive mapping. Human spatial cognition research has established important connections between cognitive psychology and cognitive neuroscience. In a number of joint projects, cognitive scientists and neuroscientists have worked together in an eVort to account for the processes that subserve spatial cognition and to identify the neurobiological infrastructure underlying them (e.g., Amorim et al., 2000; Maguire et al., 2000; Mellet et al., 2000). SigniWcant extensions have been developed in order to study how neurological and neuropsychological disorders aVect space-related representations and behavior (e.g., Denis, Beschin, Logie, & Della Sala, 2002; Guariglia & Pizzamiglio, 2006). M. Denis (&) “Realite Virtuelle et Cognition”, LIMSI-CNRS, Universite de Paris-Sud, BP 133, 91403 Orsay Cedex, France e-mail: denis@limsi.fr