Cited by 3Spatial Cognition and NavigationCategorization, perception, and languageMemory and Neural Mechanisms

How to construct a linguistic landmark: language cues in the formation of hierarchical representations of space

Schick, Wiebke, Halfmann, Marc, Mallot, Hanspeter A.·2015·Cognitive Processing

Abstract

The formation of a hierarchical representation of space can be induced by the spatial adjacency of places marked by landmark objects from the same semantic category, as was demonstrated by a route-planning experiment (Wiener and Mallot in Spat Cogn Comput 3(4):331-358, 2003). Using the same paradigm, we tested the efficiency of linguistic cues with various hierarchical categorization principles in regional structuring. In five different conditions, places of the experimental environment were characterized (1) by landmark objects, (2) by arbitrary proper names on region level, (3) by prototypical names on region level, (4) by nouns from different semantic categories, and (5) by groups of nouns with intrinsic whole-part relation. A region effect comparable to the landmark object condition was found only for the whole-part relations, which combine spatial proximity with a shared context. A linguistic analysis revealed a correspondence to the intended regional subdivision only for the cues of this condition.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10339-015-0722-9

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The influence of stored knowledge on segmentation of environments into subregions is suggested by studies showing that human spatial representations are prone to systematic biases and may be hierarchically organized, similar to semantic and event knowledge.

    “The influence of stored knowledge on segmentation of environments into subregions is suggested by studies showing that human spatial representations are prone to systematic biases 136,137 and may be hierarchically organized, similar to semantic and event knowledge 133,138,139 .”

    From From cognitive maps to spatial schemas (2023) · cites this paper as [133]

  • Navigation planning follows a hierarchical representation of space that consists of a series of contexts that, in humans, is mediated by the dorsomedial PFC.

    “Studies of navigation support the idea that navigation planning follows a hierarchical representation of space that consist of a series of contexts that, in humans, is mediated by the dorsomedial PFC 128,133,159,204 .”

    From From cognitive maps to spatial schemas (2023) · cites this paper as [133]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schick, W., Halfmann, M., & Mallot, H. A.
Affiliations
University of Tübingen (DE)
Corresponding author
Schick, Wiebke
Venue
Cognitive Processing
Published
2015-08-11
Volume
16
Issue
S1
Pages
383-388
ISSN
  • 1612-4782 (ISSN-L)
  • 1612-4790
OpenAlex
W1152457807
Cited by
3
References
9
Citations by year
2022: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
0.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cognitive Processing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
route planning, spatial categorization, part-whole relations, semantic categories, proper names, spatial adjacency
MeSH terms
Adult, Choice Behavior, Cues, Female, Humans, Language, Linguistics, Male, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Space Perception, Young Adult

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