Reorientation in the real world: The development of landmark use and integration in a natural environment

An influential series of studies have argued that young children are unable to use landmark information to reorient. However, these studies have used artificial experimental environments that may lead to an underestimation of the children's ability. We tested whether young children could reorient using landmarks in an ecologically valid setting. Children aged between 3 and 7 years completed a reorientation task in open parkland, and the properties of the search array (size and distinctiveness) were manipulated in a within-subjects design. Responses were recorded using Global Positioning Systems technology. All age groups performed above chance level, demonstrating that young children can reorient using natural landmarks. This behaviour was modulated by the nature of the search array: children were more accurate when the locations were spaced in a large array, and when the search locations were distinctively coloured. This suggests that the integration between landmarks and search locations, at different spatial scales, is a key factor in characterising human reorientation in the real world.

[1]  Almut Hupbach,et al.  Reorientation in a rhombic environment: No evidence for an encapsulated geometric module , 2005 .

[2]  Nora S. Newcombe,et al.  Is language necessary for human spatial reorientation? Reconsidering evidence from dual task paradigms , 2008, Cognitive Psychology.

[3]  A. Siegel,et al.  The development of spatial representations of large-scale environments. , 1975, Advances in child development and behavior.

[4]  Constance Fleuriot,et al.  Location aware interactive applications , 2005, SIGGRAPH '05.

[5]  N. Burgess,et al.  Spatial memory: how egocentric and allocentric combine , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[6]  E. Spelke,et al.  Children's use of geometry and landmarks to reorient in an open space , 2001, Cognition.

[7]  John J. Rieser,et al.  Action as an organizer of learning and development , 2005 .

[8]  Bruno Poucet,et al.  Involvement of the hippocampus and associative parietal cortex in the use of proximal and distal landmarks for navigation , 2000, Behavioural Brain Research.

[9]  J. Gaddum Probit Analysis , 1948, Nature.

[10]  F. J. Langdon,et al.  The Child's Conception of Space , 1967 .

[11]  Lynn Nadel,et al.  Children's Use of Landmarks: Implications for Modularity Theory , 2002, Psychological science.

[12]  M Zanforlin,et al.  Geometric modules in animals' spatial representations: a test with chicks (Gallus gallus domesticus). , 1990, Journal of comparative psychology.

[13]  Elizabeth S. Spelke,et al.  A geometric process for spatial reorientation in young children , 1994, Nature.

[14]  Nora S. Newcombe,et al.  1 Explaining the Development of Spatial Reorientation : Modularity-Plus-Language Versus the Emergence of Adaptive Combination , 2007 .

[15]  R. Muller,et al.  Failure of Centrally Placed Objects to Control the Firing Fields of Hippocampal Place Cells , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[16]  J. Spencer,et al.  The Emerging Spatial Mind , 2007 .

[17]  Christian J. Rapold,et al.  Cognitive cladistics and cultural override in Hominid spatial cognition , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[18]  I. Whishaw,et al.  Homing with locale, taxon, and dead reckoning strategies by foraging rats: sensory hierarchy in spatial navigation , 1999, Behavioural Brain Research.

[19]  Nora S. Newcombe,et al.  Explaining the Development of Spatial Reorientation , 2007 .

[20]  Marc D. Hauser,et al.  The role of landmarks in cotton-top tamarin spatial foraging: evidence for geometric and non-geometric features , 2001, Animal Cognition.

[21]  E. Spelke,et al.  Modularity and development: the case of spatial reorientation , 1996, Cognition.

[22]  Juan Pedro Vargas,et al.  Encoding of geometric and featural spatial information by goldfish (Carassius auratus). , 2004, Journal of comparative psychology.

[23]  L. Hermer-Vazquez,et al.  Language, space, and the development of cognitive flexibility in humans: the case of two spatial memory tasks , 2001, Cognition.

[24]  J. Taube,et al.  Effects of repeated disorientation on the acquisition of spatial tasks in rats: dissociation between the appetitive radial arm maze and aversive water maze. , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[25]  B. McNaughton,et al.  Place cells, head direction cells, and the learning of landmark stability , 1995, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[26]  J. Huttenlocher,et al.  Toddlers' use of metric information and landmarks to reorient. , 2001, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[27]  Sang Ah Lee,et al.  Reorientation and Landmark-Guided Search by Young Children , 2006, Psychological science.

[28]  Elizabeth S. Spelke,et al.  Sources of Flexibility in Human Cognition: Dual-Task Studies of Space and Language , 1999, Cognitive Psychology.