Understanding the role of distance, direction and cue salience in an associative model of landmark learning

Navigation and spatial memory relies on the ability to use and recall environmental landmarks relative to important locations. Such learning is thought to result from the strengthening of associations between the goal location and environmental cues. Factors that contribute to the strength of this association include cue stability, saliency and cue location. Here we combine an autoregressive random walk model, that describes goal-directed swimming behaviour, with an associative learning model to provide an integrated model of landmark learning, using the water maze task. The model allows for the contribution of each cue, the salience and the vector information provided (both distance and directional) to be separately analysed. The model suggests that direction and distance information are independent components and can influence searching patterns. Importantly, the model can also be used to simulate various experimental scenarios to understand what has been learnt in relation to the cues, thereby offering new insights into how animals navigate.

[1]  S. Commins,et al.  Learning efficiency: The influence of cue salience during spatial navigation , 2015, Behavioural Processes.

[2]  V. D. Chamizo,et al.  Navigation with two landmarks in rats (Rattus norvegicus): the role of landmark salience. , 2014, Journal of comparative psychology.

[3]  V. D. Chamizo,et al.  Generalization decrement and not overshadowing by associative competition among pairs of landmarks in a navigation task. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[4]  Neil Burgess,et al.  Distinct error-correcting and incidental learning of location relative to landmarks and boundaries , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[5]  K. Cheng,et al.  The determination of direction in landmark-based spatial search in pigeons: A further test of the vector sum model , 1994 .

[6]  Travis E. Johnson,et al.  The relative influence of place and direction in the Morris water task. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[7]  R. Morris Developments of a water-maze procedure for studying spatial learning in the rat , 1984, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[8]  Yutaka Kosaki,et al.  Overshadowing of geometry learning by discrete landmarks in the water maze: effects of relative salience and relative validity of competing cues. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[9]  N. Newcombe,et al.  Is there a geometric module for spatial orientation? squaring theory and evidence , 2005, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[10]  N. Mackintosh,et al.  Associative learning and elemental representation: II. Generalization and discrimination , 2002, Animal learning & behavior.

[11]  Ken Cheng,et al.  Landmark use by Clark’s nutcrackers (Nucifraga columbiana): influence of disorientation and cue rotation on distance and direction estimates , 2009, Animal Cognition.

[12]  Anthony McGregor,et al.  Absence of an interaction between navigational strategies based on local and distal landmarks. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[13]  Alan C. Kamil,et al.  The seed-storing corvid Clark's nutcracker learns geometric relationships among landmarks , 1997, Nature.

[14]  A. Kamil,et al.  Geometric rule learning by Clark's nutcrackers (Nucifraga columbiana). , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[15]  V. D. Chamizo,et al.  Blocking in the spatial domain. , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[16]  R. Shepard,et al.  Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science. , 1987, Science.

[17]  S. Commins,et al.  The effects of overtraining in the Morris water maze on allocentric and egocentric learning strategies in rats , 2008, Behavioural Brain Research.

[18]  S. Shettleworth,et al.  Learning about Environmental Geometry: an Associative Model , 2022 .

[19]  Sarah Craig,et al.  Retention of cue-based associations in the water maze is time-dependent and sensitive to disruption by rotating the starting position , 2004, Behavioural Brain Research.

[20]  A C Kamil,et al.  Way-finding and landmarks: the multiple-bearings hypothesis. , 2001, The Journal of experimental biology.

[21]  R U Muller,et al.  Head-direction cells recorded from the postsubiculum in freely moving rats. I. Description and quantitative analysis , 1990, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[22]  V. D. Chamizo,et al.  The influence of landmark salience in a navigation task: an additive effect between its components. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[23]  J. Pearce Evaluation and development of a connectionist theory of configural learning , 2002, Animal learning & behavior.

[24]  E. Redhead,et al.  Interaction between locale and taxon strategies in human spatial learning , 2007 .

[25]  T. S. Collett,et al.  Landmark learning and visuo-spatial memories in gerbils , 1986, Journal of Comparative Physiology A.

[26]  R. Passingham The hippocampus as a cognitive map J. O'Keefe & L. Nadel, Oxford University Press, Oxford (1978). 570 pp., £25.00 , 1979, Neuroscience.

[27]  Dirk Fey,et al.  Feedback control strategies for spatial navigation revealed by dynamic modelling of learning in the Morris water maze , 2011, Journal of Computational Neuroscience.

[28]  M. Fyhn,et al.  Spatial Representation in the Entorhinal Cortex , 2004, Science.

[29]  P. Dudchenko The hippocampus as a cognitive map , 2010 .

[30]  V. D. Chamizo,et al.  Competition between landmarks in spatial learning: The role of proximity to the goal , 2006, Behavioural Processes.

[31]  I. Whishaw,et al.  Sequential control of navigation by locale and taxon cues in the Morris water task , 2004, Behavioural Brain Research.

[32]  V. D. Chamizo,et al.  Overshadowing in the spatial domain , 1999 .

[33]  S. Ghirlanda,et al.  A century of generalization , 2003, Animal Behaviour.

[34]  Katherine G Akers,et al.  How do room and apparatus cues control navigation in the Morris water task? Evidence for distinct contributions to a movement vector. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Animal behavior processes.

[35]  Victoria D. Chamizo,et al.  Effects of Absolute Proximity Between Landmark and Platform in a Virtual Morris Pool Task with Humans , 2005 .

[36]  Ken Cheng,et al.  25 years of research on the use of geometry in spatial reorientation: a current theoretical perspective , 2013, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[37]  J. Aggleton,et al.  Mapping immediate‐early gene activity in the rat after place learning in a water‐maze: the importance of matched control conditions , 2008, The European journal of neuroscience.

[38]  J. Pearce,et al.  Failure of a landmark to restrict spatial learning based on the shape of the environment , 2004, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. B, Comparative and physiological psychology.

[39]  R. Rescorla,et al.  A theory of Pavlovian conditioning : Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement , 1972 .

[40]  K. Cheng Distances and directions are computed separately by honeybees in landmark-based search , 1998 .

[41]  S. Commins,et al.  Hippocampal contribution to vector model hypothesis during cue-dependent navigation. , 2013, Learning & memory.