CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 492Spatial Cognition and NavigationMemory Processes and InfluencesMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Systems of Spatial Reference in Human Memory

Shelton, Amy L., McNamara, Timothy P.·2001·Cognitive Psychology
DOI 10.1006/cogp.2001.0758
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Seven experiments examined the spatial reference systems used in memory to represent the locations of objects in the environment. Participants learned the locations of common objects in a room and then made judgments of relative direction using their memories of the layout (e.g., "Imagine you are standing at the shoe, facing the lamp; point to the clock"). The experiments manipulated the number of views that observers were allowed to experience, the presence or absence of local and global reference systems (e.g., a rectangular mat on which objects were placed and the walls of the room, respectively), and the congruence of local and global reference systems. Judgments of relative direction were more accurate for imagined headings parallel to study views than for imagined headings parallel to novel views, even with up to three study views. However, study views misaligned with salient reference systems in the environment were not strongly represented if they were experienced in the context of aligned views. Novel views aligned with a local reference system were, under certain conditions, easier to imagine than were novel views misaligned with the local reference system. We propose that learning and remembering the spatial structure of the surrounding environment involves interpreting the layout in terms of a spatial reference system. This reference system is imposed on the environment but defined by egocentric experience.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/cogp.2001.0758

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • People perform better in judgment of relative direction tests when their heading direction is parallel to the study view than novel views.

    “People perform better in judgment of relative direction tests when their heading direction is parallel to the study view than novel views (Shelton & McNamara, 2001).”

    From This is not the way: global directional cues do not improve spatial learning in an immersive virtual environment (2025) · cites this paper as Shelton & McNamara, 2001

    The Results and Discussion (pp. 21, 25) report more accurate judgments of relative direction for imagined headings oriented with study views than for novel headings. But this does not hold for every study view: in Experiment 1 (p. 10), headings parallel to a misaligned study view were no more accurate than novel headings. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Previous behavioral work with the JRD task has found evidence for coding of locations and directions in spatial reference frames aligned to local features of the environment such as room geometry or the arrangement of objects within a room, and also in frames aligned to egocentric axes when external features are absent.

    “Previous behavioral work with the JRD task has found evidence for coding of locations and directions in spatial reference frames aligned to local features of the environment such as room geometry or the arrangement of objects within a room (and also in frames aligned to egocentric axes when external features are absent)19, 20.”

    From Anchoring the neural compass: coding of local spatial reference frames in human medial parietal lobe (2014) · cites this paper as [19]

  • The direction facing the wall opposite the doorway served as a "conceptual north" within each environment.

    “suggesting that this direction served as a “conceptual north” within each environment19”

    From Anchoring the neural compass: coding of local spatial reference frames in human medial parietal lobe (2014) · cites this paper as [19]

  • In cases where subjects have experienced only one view of an environment, accuracy is greater and reaction times are faster for imagined views that face the same direction as the learned view, irrespective of the imagined location.

    “In cases where subjects have experienced only one view of an environment, accuracy is greater and reaction times are faster for imagined views that face the same direction as the learned view, irrespective of the imagined location19.”

    From Anchoring the neural compass: coding of local spatial reference frames in human medial parietal lobe (2014) · cites this paper as [19]

  • In cases where subjects have learned multiple views of an environment, or have extensive experience over time, performance is typically best for a single imagined facing direction that acts as a "conceptual north," and it is better for facing directions that are aligned or orthogonal to this primary reference direction than for directions that are misaligned.

    “In cases where subjects have learned multiple views of an environment, or have extensive experience over time, performance is typically best for a single imagined facing direction that acts as a “conceptual north,” and it is better for facing directions that are aligned or orthogonal to this primary reference direction than for directions that are misaligned19, 20.”

    From Anchoring the neural compass: coding of local spatial reference frames in human medial parietal lobe (2014) · cites this paper as [19]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Shelton, A. L., & McNamara, T. P.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Cognitive Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2001-12
Volume
43
Issue
4
Pages
274-310
ISSN
0010-0285 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1006/cogp.2001.0758
OpenAlex
W2095733006
Cited by
490
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 29
FWCI
75.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Cognitive Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5f32mh012638-02)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01-MH57868, R01MH057868, F32-MH12638)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
spatial reference systems, spatial memory, spatial configuration, object location memory
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Imagination, Male, Orientation, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Problem Solving, Mental Recall, Space Perception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review