Spatial reasoning with multiple intrinsic frames of reference.

Establishing and updating spatial relationships between objects in the environment is vital to maintaining situation awareness and supporting many socio-spatial tasks. In a complex environment, people often need to utilize multiple reference systems that are intrinsic to different objects (intrinsic frame of reference, IFOR), but these IFORs may conflict with each other in one or more ways. Current spatial cognition theories do not adequately address how people handle multi-IFOR reasoning problems. Two experiments manipulated relative orientations of two task-relevant objects with intrinsic axes of orientation as well as their relative task salience. Response times (RTs) decreased with increasing salience of the targeted IFOR. In addition, RTs increased as a consequence of intrinsic orientation conflict, but not by amount of orientation difference. The results suggest that people encounter difficulties when they have to process two conflicting IFOR representations, and that they seem to prioritize processing of each IFOR by salience.

[1]  Daniel J. Acheson,et al.  Increased Alpha-Band Power during the Retention of Shapes and Shape-Location Associations in Visual Short-Term Memory , 2011, Front. Psychology.

[2]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  Multiple Systems for Spatial Imagery: Transformations of Objects and Bodies , 2005, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[3]  R. Shepard,et al.  Mental Rotation of Three-Dimensional Objects , 1971, Science.

[4]  D. R. Montello,et al.  Learning a Spatial Skill for Surgery : How the Contributions of Abilities Change With Practice , 2006 .

[5]  Willem J. M. Levelt,et al.  Perspective taking and ellipsis in spatial descriptions , 1996 .

[6]  E. Spelke,et al.  Human Spatial Representation: Insights from Animals , 2002 .

[7]  Jeffrey M. Zacks,et al.  Two kinds of visual perspective taking , 2006, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  Jeffrey M. Zacks,et al.  Transformations of visuospatial images. , 2005, Behavioral and cognitive neuroscience reviews.

[9]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Orientation Tasks with Multiple Views of Space: Strategies and Performance , 2004, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[10]  Hui Zhang,et al.  Novel-view scene recognition relies on identifying spatial reference directions , 2009, Cognition.

[11]  Klaus Kessler,et al.  The embodied nature of spatial perspective taking: Embodied transformation versus sensorimotor interference , 2010, Cognition.

[12]  P. Bloom,et al.  Language and space , 1998 .

[13]  Klaus Kessler,et al.  The Two Forms of Visuo-Spatial Perspective Taking are Differently Embodied and Subserve Different Spatial Prepositions , 2010, Front. Psychology.

[14]  Hongbin Wang,et al.  Perception of Space by Multiple Intrinsic Frames of Reference , 2010, PloS one.

[15]  S. Levinson.  Frames of reference and Molyneux's question: Cross-linguistic evidence , 1996 .

[16]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Neural systems that encode categorical versus coordinate spatial relations: PET investigations , 1998, Psychobiology.

[17]  M. Kozhevnikov,et al.  Perspective-Taking vs. Mental Rotation Transformations and How They Predict Spatial Navigation Performance. , 2006 .

[18]  Jennifer M. Shephard,et al.  Imagined rotations of self versus objects: an fMRI study , 2005, Neuropsychologia.

[19]  A. Wohlschläger,et al.  Mental and manual rotation , 1998 .

[20]  Punit Shah.  Toward a Neurobiology of Unrealistic Optimism , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[21]  Lawrence M. Parsons,et al.  Superior parietal cortices and varieties of mental rotation , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[22]  T. McNamara,et al.  Intrinsic frames of reference in spatial memory , 2002 .

[23]  Todd R. Johnson,et al.  Prioritized Spatial Updating in the Intrinsic Frame of Reference , 2005, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[24]  R L Klatzky,et al.  Path integration while ignoring irrelevant movement. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[25]  Joachim Grabowski,et al.  A uniform anthropomorphological approach to the human conception of dimensional relations , 1999, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[26]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Implicit transfer of motor strategies in mental rotation , 2003, Brain and Cognition.

[27]  T. McNamara,et al.  Intrinsic orientation and study viewpoint in recognizing spatial structure of a shape , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[28]  Timothy P. McNamara,et al.  Systems of Spatial Reference in Human Memory , 2001, Cognitive Psychology.

[29]  B. Tversky,et al.  Embodied and disembodied cognition: Spatial perspective-taking , 2009, Cognition.

[30]  George A. Miller,et al.  Factors Affecting the Use of Dimensional Prepositions in German and American English: Object Orientation, Social Context, and Prepositional Pattern , 2000 .