Geometric and featural systems, separable and combined: Evidence from reorientation in people with Williams syndrome

Spatial reorientation by humans and other animals engages geometric representations of surface layouts as well as featural landmarks; however, the two types of information are thought to be behaviorally and neurally separable. In this paper, we examine the use of these two types of information during reorientation among children and adults with Williams syndrome (WS), a genetic disorder accompanied by abnormalities in brain regions that support use of both geometry and landmarks. Previous studies of reorientation in adolescents and adults with WS have shown deficits in the ability to use geometry for reorientation, but intact ability to use features, suggesting that the two systems can be differentially impaired by genetic disorder. Using a slightly modified layout, we found that many WS participants could use geometry, and most could use features along with geometry. However, the developmental trajectories for the two systems were quite different from one other, and different from those found in typical development. Purely geometric responding was not correlated with age in WS, and search processes appeared similar to those in typically developing (TD) children. In contrast, use of features in combination with geometry was correlated with age in WS, and search processes were distinctly different from TD children. The results support the view that use of geometry and features stem from different underlying mechanisms, that the developmental trajectories and operation of each are altered in WS, and that combination of information from the two systems is atypical. Given brain abnormalities in regions supporting the two kinds of information, our findings suggest that the co-operation of the two systems is functionally altered in this genetic syndrome.

[1]  K. Cheng A purely geometric module in the rat's spatial representation , 1986, Cognition.

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

[3]  Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg,et al.  Genetic Contributions to Human Gyrification: Sulcal Morphometry in Williams Syndrome , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[4]  Paul Koch,et al.  Functional, structural, and metabolic abnormalities of the hippocampal formation in Williams syndrome. , 2005, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[5]  C. Gallistel,et al.  The neuroscience of learning: beyond the Hebbian synapse. , 2013, Annual review of psychology.

[6]  I. Sigel,et al.  HANDBOOK OF CHILD PSYCHOLOGY , 2006 .

[7]  Juan Pedro Vargas,et al.  Hippocampal formation is required for geometric navigation in pigeons , 2004, The European journal of neuroscience.

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

[9]  Valeria Anna Sovrano,et al.  Spatial reorientation: the effects of space size on the encoding of landmark and geometry information , 2007, Animal Cognition.

[10]  Nora S Newcombe,et al.  Reorienting When Cues Conflict , 2008, Psychological science.

[11]  Christian F. Doeller,et al.  Parallel striatal and hippocampal systems for landmarks and boundaries in spatial memory , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[12]  Giorgio Vallortigara,et al.  Stable Panoramic Views Facilitate Snap-Shot Like Memories for Spatial Reorientation in Homing Pigeons , 2011, PloS one.

[13]  Valeria Anna Sovrano,et al.  Reorientation by geometric and landmark information in environments of different size. , 2005, Developmental science.

[14]  Alexandra D. Twyman,et al.  Malleability in the development of spatial reorientation. , 2013, Developmental psychobiology.

[15]  Sang Ah Lee,et al.  Navigation as a source of geometric knowledge: Young children’s use of length, angle, distance, and direction in a reorientation task , 2012, Cognition.

[16]  N. Burgess Spatial Cognition and the Brain , 2008, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[17]  Jennifer E Sutton,et al.  Spinning in the scanner: neural correlates of virtual reorientation. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[18]  Gabriele Janzen,et al.  Selective neural representation of objects relevant for navigation , 2004, Nature Neuroscience.

[19]  Christian F. Doeller,et al.  The role of landmarks and boundaries in the development of spatial memory. , 2009, Developmental science.

[20]  M. D’Esposito,et al.  Topographical disorientation: a synthesis and taxonomy. , 1999, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[21]  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.

[22]  Giorgio Vallortigara,et al.  Is there an innate geometric module? Effects of experience with angular geometric cues on spatial re-orientation based on the shape of the environment , 2007, Animal Cognition.

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

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

[25]  E. Spelke,et al.  Inexperienced newborn chicks use geometry to spontaneously reorient to an artificial social partner. , 2015, Developmental science.

[26]  Ken Cheng,et al.  Whither geometry? Troubles of the geometric module , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[27]  Sang Ah Lee,et al.  A modular geometric mechanism for reorientation in children , 2010, Cognitive Psychology.

[28]  R. Clark,et al.  The medial temporal lobe. , 2004, Annual review of neuroscience.

[29]  M A Good,et al.  Hippocampal lesions disrupt navigation based on the shape of the environment. , 2004, Behavioral neuroscience.

[30]  Richard S. J. Frackowiak,et al.  Navigation-related structural change in the hippocampi of taxi drivers. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[31]  G. Vallortigara,et al.  From natural geometry to spatial cognition , 2012, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[32]  Sang Ah Lee,et al.  Navigation by environmental geometry: the use of zebrafish as a model , 2013, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[33]  Marcia L Spetch,et al.  Reorientation in a two-dimensional environment: II. Do pigeons (Columba livia) encode the featural and geometric properties of a two-dimensional schematic of a room? , 2004, Journal of comparative psychology.

[34]  Ronald V. Schmelzer,et al.  Differential Abilities Scales , 2008 .

[35]  L. Hildman,et al.  Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test , 1993 .

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

[37]  N. Schneiderman,et al.  Delay versus trace heart-rate classical discrimination conditioning in rabbits as a function of interstimulus interval. , 1969, Journal of experimental psychology.

[38]  Stephan Eliez,et al.  IV. Neuroanatomy of Williams Syndrome: A High-Resolution MRI Study , 2000, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[39]  Sang Ah Lee,et al.  Chicks, like children, spontaneously reorient by three-dimensional environmental geometry, not by image matching , 2012, Biology Letters.

[40]  Joseph M. Austen,et al.  Transfer of spatial search between environments in human adults and young children (Homo sapiens): implications for representation of local geometry by spatial systems. , 2014, Developmental psychobiology.

[41]  Sang Ah Lee,et al.  Spontaneous Reorientation Is Guided by Perceived Surface Distance, Not by Image Matching Or Comparison , 2012, PloS one.

[42]  Barbara Landau,et al.  Spatial Representation: From Gene to Mind , 2012 .

[43]  Valeria Anna Sovrano,et al.  Dissecting the Geometric Module , 2006, Psychological science.

[44]  Valeria Anna Sovrano,et al.  Animals' use of landmarks and metric information to reorient: effects of the size of the experimental space , 2005, Cognition.

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

[46]  Nora S Newcombe,et al.  Why size counts: children's spatial reorientation in large and small enclosures. , 2008, Developmental science.

[47]  J. Huttenlocher,et al.  Development of Spatial Cognition , 2007 .

[48]  Nancy Kanwisher,et al.  A cortical representation of the local visual environment , 1998, Nature.

[49]  Melissa E. Libertus,et al.  Understanding the mapping between numerical approximation and number words: evidence from Williams syndrome and typical development. , 2014, Developmental science.

[50]  Giorgio Vallortigara,et al.  Separate processing mechanisms for encoding of geometric and landmark information in the avian hippocampus , 2003, The European journal of neuroscience.

[51]  Russell A. Epstein,et al.  Hippocampal size predicts rapid learning of a cognitive map in humans , 2013, Hippocampus.

[52]  Janellen Huttenlocher,et al.  How toddlers represent enclosed spaces , 2003, Cogn. Sci..

[53]  Barbara Landau,et al.  Impaired geometric reorientation caused by genetic defect , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[54]  Giorgio Vallortigara,et al.  Experience and geometry: controlled-rearing studies with chicks , 2010, Animal Cognition.

[55]  Sang Ah Lee,et al.  Cognitive effects of language on human navigation , 2011, Cognition.

[56]  Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg,et al.  Neural mechanisms in Williams syndrome: a unique window to genetic influences on cognition and behaviour , 2006, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[57]  C. Mervis,et al.  Neural Basis of Genetically Determined Visuospatial Construction Deficit in Williams Syndrome , 2004, Neuron.

[58]  Stella F. Lourenco,et al.  Using geometry to specify location: implications for spatial coding in children and nonhuman animals , 2007, Psychological research.

[59]  C. Gallistel The organization of learning , 1990 .

[60]  Carolyn B. Mervis,et al.  The Williams Syndrome Cognitive Profile , 2000, Brain and Cognition.

[61]  Alinda Friedman,et al.  Penetrating the geometric module: catalyzing children's use of landmarks. , 2007, Developmental psychology.

[62]  Sang Ah Lee,et al.  Children's use of geometry for reorientation. , 2008, Developmental science.

[63]  Sang Ah Lee,et al.  Young Children Reorient by Computing Layout Geometry, Not by Matching Images of the Environment , 2010 .

[64]  Alexandra D. Twyman,et al.  Young children's use of features to reorient is more than just associative: further evidence against a modular view of spatial processing. , 2010, Developmental science.

[65]  U Bellugi,et al.  Evidence for superior parietal impairment in Williams syndrome , 2005, Neurology.

[66]  Russell A. Epstein Parahippocampal and retrosplenial contributions to human spatial navigation , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[67]  Valeria Anna Sovrano,et al.  How fish do geometry in large and in small spaces , 2006, Animal Cognition.

[68]  Mark Blades,et al.  How do individuals with Williams syndrome learn a route in a real-world environment? , 2010, Developmental science.

[69]  Giorgio Vallortigara,et al.  Spatial reorientation by geometry with freestanding objects and extended surfaces: a unifying view , 2012, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

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

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

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

[73]  J. Huttenlocher,et al.  Making Space: The Development of Spatial Representation and Reasoning , 2000 .