Advertisement

Orientation-dependent spatial memories for scenes viewed on mobile devices

  • Savvas Avraam
  • Adamantini Hatzipanayioti
  • Marios N. Avraamides
Original Article

Abstract

We examined whether spatial representations for scenes experienced on the screens of mobile devices are orientation dependent and whether the type of movement (physical vs. simulated) during learning affects the encoding and the retrieval of spatial information. Participants studied a spatial layout depicted on a tablet and then carried out perspective-taking trials in which they localized objects from imagined perspectives. Depending on condition, participants either rotated the tablet along with their body or remained stationary and swiped with their finger on the screen to change their viewpoint within the scene. Results showed that participants were faster and more accurate to point to objects from an imagined perspective that was aligned than misaligned to their initial physical orientation during learning, suggesting that they had formed an orientation-dependent representation. Although no differences were found between movement conditions during pointing, participants were faster to encode spatial information with physical than simulated movement.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in the reported study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Cyprus National Biothetics Committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Avraamides, M. N., & Kelly, J. W. (2005). Imagined perspective-changing within and across novel environments. In Spatial cognition 2004-lecture notes in artificial intelligence (pp. 245–258). Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32255-9_15.Google Scholar
  2. Avraamides, M. N., & Kelly, J. W. (2008). Multiple systems of spatial memory and action. Cognitive Processing, 9, 93–106.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-007-0188-5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Hatzipanayioti, A., Galati, A., & Avraamides, M. N. (2015). The Protagonist’s first perspective influences the encoding of spatial information in narratives. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69, 505–520.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2015.1056194.Google Scholar
  4. Kelly, J. W., Avraamides, M. N., & Loomis, J. M. (2007). Sensorimotor alignment effects in the learning Environment and in novel Environments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 33, 1092–1107.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.33.6.1092.Google Scholar
  5. Loomis, J. M., Lippa, Y., Klatzky, R. L., & Golledge, R. G. (2002). Spatial updating of locations specified by 3-d sound and spatial language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 28, 335–345.  https://doi.org/10.1037/e501882009-156.Google Scholar
  6. McNamara, T. P. (2003). How are the locations of objects in the environment represented in memory? In C. Freksa, W. Brauer, C. Habel & K. F. Wender (Eds.), Spatial Cognition III: Routes and navigation, human memory and learning, spatial representation and spatial reasoning, LNAI 2685 (pp. 174–191). Berlin: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45004-1_11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Mou, W., Biocca, F., Owen, C. B., Tang, A., Xiao, F., & Lim, L. (2004). Frames of reference in mobile augmented reality displays. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 10(4), 238–244.  https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.10.4.238.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Mou, W., McNamara, T. P., Valiquette, C. M., & Rump, B. (2004). Allocentric and egocentric updating of spatial memories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 30, 142–157.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.1.142.Google Scholar
  9. Presson, C. C., & Montello, D. R. (1994). Updating after rotational and translational body movements: Coordinate structure of perspective space. Perception, 23, 1447–1455.  https://doi.org/10.1068/p231447.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Rideout, V., & Saphir, M. (2013). Zero to eight: Children’s media use in America 2013. San Francisco: Common Sense Media.Google Scholar
  11. Rieser, J. J. (1989). Access to knowledge of spatial structure at novel points of observation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 15, 1157–1165.  https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.15.6.1157.Google Scholar
  12. Rieser, J. J., Guth, D. A., & Hill, E. W. (1986). Sensitivity to perspective structure while walking without vision. Perception, 15, 173–188.  https://doi.org/10.1068/p150173.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Shelton, A. L., & McNamara, T. P. (1997). Multiple views of spatial memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 102–106.  https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03210780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of CyprusNicosiaCyprus
  2. 2.Silversky3D Virtual Reality Technologies LtdNicosiaCyprus
  3. 3.Max-Planck-Institute for Biological CyberneticsTübingenGermany
  4. 4.RISE Centre NicosiaNicosiaCyprus

Personalised recommendations