Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ambiguity in Acquiring Spatial Representation from Descriptions Compared to Depictions: The Role of Spatial Orientation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Spatial Information Theory (COSIT 2001)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2205))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1169 Accesses

Abstract

Adults can make judgments about multiple spatial relations based on information gained from different kinds of input, including maps, descriptions, and through navigation [1]. However, factors such as spatial orientation influence performance. We investigated spatial orientation effects on learning from different media. In Experiment 1, participants learned a house from a map or a description. They then judged surrounding locations while imagining being in each room and they reconstructed the house. Participants who learned from a description performed worse on both tasks. Errors suggested they interpreted the term “in front” differently than intended [2]. Experiment 2 tested this hypothesis by examining two factors influencing interpretation of “in front”, specific interpretation instructions and orientation information. The orientation information influenced performance more than the explicit interpretation of “in front.” Taken together, the results indicate multiple influences on the spatial reference frame participants use to interpret spatial terms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Taylor, H.A. and B. Tversky: Spatial mental models derived from survey and route descriptions. J. Mem. Lang. 31 (1992) 261–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hill, C.: Up/down, front/back, left/right: A contrastive study of Hausa and English. In: J. Weissen and W. Klein, Editors: Here and there: Crosslinguistic studies on deixis and demonstration. Benjamins, Amsterdam (1982) 13–42

    Google Scholar 

  3. Presson, C.C. and M.D. Hazelrigg: Building spatial representations through primary and secondary learning. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. 10 (1984) 716–722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Evans, G.W. and K. Pezdek: Cognitive mapping: Knowledge of real-world distance and location information. J. of Exp. Psychol.—Hum L. 6 (1980) 13–24

    Google Scholar 

  5. Leiser, D., J. Tzelgov, and A. Henik: A comparison of map study methods: Simulated travel vs. conventional study. Cah. Psychol. Cogn. 7 (1987) 317-334

    Google Scholar 

  6. Perrig, W. and W. Kintsch: Propositional and situational representations of text. J. Mem. Lang. 24 (1985) 503–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sholl, M.J.: Cognitive maps as orienting schemata. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. 13 (1987) 615–628

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Thorndyke, P.W. and B. Hayes-Roth: Differences in spatial knowledge acquired from maps and navigation. Cognitive Psychol. 14 (1982) 560–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Golledge, R.G. and N.A. Spector: Comprehending the urban environment: Theory and practice. Geogr. Anal. 14 (1978) 305–325

    Google Scholar 

  10. McNamara, T.P., J.K. Hardy, and S.C. Hirtle: Subjective hierarchies in spatial memory. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. 15 (1989) 211–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Taylor, H.A. and B. Tversky: Descriptions and depictions of environments. Mem. Cognition. 20 (1992) 483–496

    Google Scholar 

  12. Taylor, H.A. and B. Tversky: Perspective in spatial descriptions. J. Mem. Lang. 35 (1996) 371–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ehrich, V. and C. Koster: Discourse organization and sentence form: The structure of room descriptions in Dutch. Discourse Process. 6 (1983) 169–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Shanon, B.: Room descriptions. Discourse Process. 7 (1984) 225–255

    Google Scholar 

  15. Levelt, W.J.M.: Cognitive styles in the use of spatial direction terms. In: R.J. Jarvella and W. Klein, Editors: Speech, place, and action. Wiley, Chichester, United Kingdom (1982) 251–268

    Google Scholar 

  16. Levelt, W.J.M.: Some perceptual limitations on talking about space. In: A.J. van Doorn, W.A. van der Grind, and J.J. Koenderink, Editors: Limits in perception. VNU Science Press, Utrecht (1984) 323–358

    Google Scholar 

  17. Carlson-Radvansky, L.A., E.S. Covey, and K.M. Lattanzi: “What” effects on “where”? Functional influences on spatial relations. Psychol. Sci. 10 (1999) 516–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Carlson-Radvansky, L.A. and D.A. Irwin: Frames of reference in vision and language: Where is above? Cognition. 46 (1993) 223–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Schober, M.F.: Spatial perspective-taking in conversation. Cognition. 47 (1993) 1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Levinson, S.C.: Frames of reference and Molyneux’s question: Crosslinguistic evidence. In: P. Bloom, et al., Editors: Language and space. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1996) 109–169

    Google Scholar 

  21. Halpern, D.F., Sex differences in cognitive abilities. 3rd ed. 2000, Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates. 420.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Taylor, H.A., et al.: Is the donut in front of the car? An electrophysiological study examining spatial reference frame processing. Can. J. Exp. Psychol. 55 (2001) 177–186

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Tufts University, Paige Hall, Medford, Massachusetts, USA, 02155

    Holly A. Taylor

  2. Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, 2029 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL, USA, 60208-2170

    David H. Uttal, Joan Fisher & Marshall Mazepa

Authors
  1. Holly A. Taylor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David H. Uttal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joan Fisher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marshall Mazepa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, 93106, USA

    Daniel R. Montello

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Taylor, H.A., Uttal, D.H., Fisher, J., Mazepa, M. (2001). Ambiguity in Acquiring Spatial Representation from Descriptions Compared to Depictions: The Role of Spatial Orientation. In: Montello, D.R. (eds) Spatial Information Theory. COSIT 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2205. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45424-1_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45424-1_19

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42613-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45424-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation