CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 5

Individual Differences in Navigation: An Introductory Overview

Meneghetti, Chiara, Miola, Laura, Feraco, Tommaso, Muffato, Veronica·2022·Prime Archives in Environmental Research
DOI 10.37247/papsy2ed.2.2022.9
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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 · 10.37247/papsy2ed.2.2022.9

Cites

6 of 6 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?

  • The Minnesota Paper Form Board test (MPFB) is a test of spatial visualization, requiring multi-step manipulations of complex spatial information.

    “This is a test of spatial visualization, where the model must perform multi-step manipulations of complex spatial information (Meneghetti et al., 2022).”

    From Does Spatial Cognition Emerge in Frontier Models? (2024) · cites this paper as Meneghetti et al., 2022

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

Research works printed but not linked: 85

  1. Montello DR. Navigation. In P. Shah, & A. Miyake (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of visuospatial thinking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2005; 257-294.
  2. Wolbers T, Hegarty M. What determines our navigational abilities? Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2010; 14: 138-146.
  3. Wiener JM, Büchner SJ, Hölscher C. Taxonomy of human wayfinding tasks: A knowledge-based approach. Spatial Cognition & Computation. 2009; 9: 152-165.
  4. Dalton RC, Hölscher C, Montello DR. Wayfinding as a social activity. Frontiers in Psychology. 2019; 10: 1-14.
  5. Richardson AE, Montello DR, Hegarty M. Spatial knowledge acquisition from maps and from navigation in real and virtual environments. Memory & Cognition. 1999; 27: 741-750.
  6. Denis M. Space and spatial cognition: A Multidisciplinary Perspective. UK: Routledge. 2018.
  7. Lhuillier S, Gyselinck V. Using virtual reality to represent space: a quick survey of promising methods to investigate spatial knowledge [Paper presentation]. In Proceedings of the Virtual Reality International Conference (VRIC), Laval Virtual, Laval, France. 2018; 57-67.
  8. Ruddle RA, Volkova E, Bülthoff HH. Walking improves your cognitive map in environments that are large-scale and large in extent. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction. 2011; 18: 1-20.
  9. Hegarty M, Montello DR, Richardson AE, Ishikawa T, Lovelace K. Spatial abilities at different scales: Individual differences in aptitude-test performance and spatial-layout learning. Intelligence. 2006; 34: 151-176. www.videleaf.com
  10. Mellet E, Laou L, Petit L, Zago L, Mazoyer B, et al. Impact of the virtual reality on the neural representation of an environment. Human Brain Mapping. 2010; 31: 1065-1075.
  11. Meneghetti C, Borella E, Pastore M, De Beni R. The role of spatial abilities and self-assessments in cardinal point orientation across the lifespan. Learning and Individual Differences. 2014; 35: 113-121.
  12. Pazzaglia F, Meneghetti C, Ronconi L. Tracing a Route and Finding a Shortcut: The Working Memory, Motivational, and Personality Factors Involved. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2018; 12: 1-11.
  13. Pazzaglia F, Meneghetti C. Acquiring spatial knowledge from different sources and perspectives: Abilities, strategies and representations. In: JM Zacks, HA Taylor, editors. Representations in mind and world. Essays inspired by Barbara tversky. UK: Routledge. 2017; 120-134.
  14. Lawton CA. Gender differences in way-finding strategies: Relationship to spatial ability and spatial anxiety. Sex Roles. 1994; 30: 765-779.
  15. Lawton CA. Gender, spatial abilities, and wayfinding. In Handbook of gender research in psychology. Berlin: Springer. 2010; 317-341.
  16. Meneghetti C, Pazzaglia F, De Beni R. Spatial mental representations derived from survey and route descriptions: When individuals prefer extrinsic frame of reference. Learning and Individual Differences. 2011; 21: 150-157.
  17. Pazzaglia F, De Beni R. Strategies of processing spatial information in survey and landmark-centred individuals. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology. 2001; 13: 493- 508.
  18. Walkowiak S, Foulsham T, Eardley AF. Individual differences and personality correlates of navigational performance in the virtual route learning task. Computers in Human Behavior. 2015; 45: 402-410.
  19. De Goede M, Postma A. Learning your way in a city: Experience and gender differences in configurational knowledge of one's environment. Frontiers in Psychology. 2015; 6: 1-9.
  20. Muffato V, Toffalini E, Meneghetti C, Carbone E, De Beni R. Individual visuo-spatial factors and familiar environment knowledge: A structural equation modeling analysis. Personality and Individual Differences. 2017; 113: 96-102.
  21. Carlson LA, Hölscher C, Shipley TF, Dalton RC. Getting lost in buildings. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2010; 19: 284-289.
  22. Hegarty M, Waller D. Individual differences in spatial abilities. In: P Shah, A Miyake, editors. The Cambridge handbook of visuospatial thinking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2006; 121-169.
  23. Linn MC, Petersen AC. Emergence and characterization of sex differences in spatial ability: a meta-analysis. Child Development. 1985; 56: 1479-1498.
  24. Piaget J, Inhelder B. The child's conception of space. In: Langdon FJ, Lunzer JN, editors. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. 1956.
  25. Vandenberg SG, Kuse AR. Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization. Perceptual and motor skills. 1978; 47: 599-604.
  26. Hegarty M, Waller D. A dissociation between mental rotation and perspective-taking spatial abilities. Intelligence. 2004; 32: 175-191.
  27. Uttal DH, Meadow NG, Tipton E, Hand LL, Alden AR, et al. The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin. 2013; 139: 352-402.
  28. Martínez K, Burgaleta M, Román FJ, Escorial S, Shih PC, et al. Can fluid intelligence be reduced to 'simple' short-term storage? Intelligence. 2011; 39: 473-480.
  29. Hund AM. Visuospatial working memory facilitates indoor wayfinding and direction giving. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2016; 45: 233-238.
  30. Labate E, Pazzaglia F, Hegarty M. What working memory subcomponents are needed in the acquisition of survey knowledge? Evidence from direction estimation and shortcut tasks. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2014; 37: 73- 79.
  31. Hegarty M, Richardson AE, Montello DR, Lovelace K, Subbiah I. Development of a self-report measure of environmental spatial ability. Intelligence. 2002; 30: 425- 447.
  32. He C, Hegarty M. How anxiety and growth mindset are linked to navigation ability: Impacts of exploration and GPS use. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2020; 71: 101475.
  33. Pazzaglia F, Meneghetti C, Labate E, Ronconi L. Are wayfinding self-efficacy and pleasure in exploring related to shortcut finding? A study in a virtual environment. In: Barkowsky T, Burte H, Hölscher C, Schultheis H, editors. Spatial Cognition X. Spatial Cognition 2016, KogWis 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Cham: Springer. 2017; 10523: 55-68.
  34. Carver CS, Scheier MF. Perspectives on personality 8th edn. United Kingdom: Pearson Education. 2016.
  35. Borella E, Meneghetti C, Ronconi L, De Beni R. Spatial abilities across the adult life span. Developmental Psychology. 2014; 50: 384-392.
  36. Miola L, Muffato V, Meneghetti C, Pazzaglia F. Spatial Learning in a Virtual Environment: The Role of Self- Efficacy Feedback and Individual Visuospatial Factors. Brain Sciences. 2021; 11: 1185.
  37. Garden S, Cornoldi C, Logie RH. Visuo-spatial working memory in navigation. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2002; 16: 35-50.
  38. Meneghetti C, Gyselinck V, Pazzaglia F, De Beni R. Individual differences in spatial text processing: High spatial ability can compensate for spatial working memory interference. Learning and Individual differences. 2009; 19: 577-589.
  39. Pazzaglia F, Taylor HA. Perspective, instruction, and cognitive style in spatial representation of a virtual environment. Spatial Cognition & Computation. 2007; 7: 349-364.
  40. Weisberg SM, Schinazi VR, Newcombe NS, Shipley TF, Epstein RA. Variations in cognitive maps: Understanding individual differences in navigation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2014; 40: 669-682.
  41. Pazzaglia F, Cornoldi C, De Beni R. Differenze individuali nella rappresentazione dello spazio e nell'abilità di orientamento: Presentazione di un questionario autovalutativo. Giornale italiano di psicologia. 2000; 27: 627-0.
  42. Allen GL, Kirasic KC, Dobson SH, Long RG, Beck S. Predicting environmental learning from spatial abilities: An indirect route. Intelligence. 1996; 22: 327-355.
  43. Meneghetti C, Zancada-Menéndez C, Sampedro-Piquero P, Lopez L, Martinelli M, et al. Mental representations derived from navigation: The role of visuo-spatial abilities and working memory. Learning and Individual Differences. 2016; 49: 314-322.
  44. Corsi PM. Human memory and the medial temporal region of the brain. Dissertation Abstracts International. University Microfilms. 1972; 34: 891B.
  45. Merrill EC, Yang Y, Roskos B, Steele S. Sex differences in using spatial and verbal abilities influence route learning performance in a virtual environment: A comparison of 6-to 12-year old boys and girls. Frontiers in Psychology. 2016; 7: 258.
  46. Hund AM, Minarik JL. Getting from here to there: Spatial anxiety, wayfinding strategies, direction type, and wayfinding efficiency. Spatial Cognition and Computation. 2006; 6: 179-201.
  47. Meneghetti C, Miola L, Toffalini E, Pastore M, Pazzaglia F. Learning from navigation, and tasks assessing its accuracy: The role of visuospatial abilities and wayfinding inclinations. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2021; 75: 101614.
  48. Muffato V, Feraco T, Miola L, Tortora C, Pazzaglia F, et al. Finding the shortest path in a familiar environment: A comparison between describing and walking a path after accounting for the role of individual factors. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2021; 78: 101708.
  49. Muffato V, Meneghetti C, De Beni R. Not all is lost in older adults' route learning: The role of visuo-spatial abilities and type of task. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2016; 47: 230-241.
  50. Meneghetti C, Muffato V, Toffalini E, Altoè G. The contribution of visuo-spatial factors in representing a familiar environment: The case of undergraduate students at a university campus. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2017; 54: 160-168.
  51. Coluccia E, Louse G. Gender differences in spatial orientation: A review. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2004; 24: 329-340.
  52. Munion AK, Stefanucci JK, Rovira E, Squire P, Hendricks M. Gender differences in spatial navigation: Characterizing wayfinding behaviors. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2019; 26: 1933-1940.
  53. Miola L, Meneghetti C, Toffalini E, Pazzaglia F. Environmental learning in a virtual environment: Do gender, spatial self-efficacy, and visuospatial abilities matter? Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2021; 78: 101704.
  54. Lester AW, Moffat SD, Wiener JM, Barnes CA, Wolbers T. The Aging Navigational System. Neuron. 2017; 95: 1019- 1035.
  55. Muffato V, Meneghetti C, De Beni R. The role of visuo- spatial abilities in environment learning from maps and navigation over the adult lifespan. British Journal of Psychology. 2020; 1411: 70-91.
  56. Muffato V, De Beni R. Path learning from navigation in aging: The role of cognitive functioning and wayfinding Inclinations. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2020; 14: 8.
  57. Kirasic KC. Age differences in adults' spatial abilities,learning environmental layout, and wayfinding behavior. Spatial Cognition & Computation. 2000; 2: 117- 134.
  58. Baltes PB, Staudinger UM. Wisdom: A metaheuristic (pragmatic) to orchestrate mind and virtue toward excellence. The American Psychologist. 2000; 55: 122-136.
  59. Yang Y, Faught GG, Merrill EC. Parent reports of wayfinding by their children with Down syndrome. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability. 2018; 43: 483- 493.
  60. Courbois Y, Blades M, Farran EK, Sockeel P. Do individuals with intellectual disability select appropriate objects as landmarks when learning a new route? Journal of Intellectual Disability Research. 2012; 57: 80-89.
  61. Purser HRM, Farran EK, Courbois Y, Lemahieu A, Sockeel P, et al. The development of route learning in Down syndrome, Williams syndrome and typical development: Investigation with virtual environments. Developmental Science. 2015; 18: 599-613.
  62. Mengue-Topio H, Courbois Y, Farran EK, Sockeel P. Route learning and shortcut performance in adults with intellectual disability: A study with virtual environments. Research in Developmental Disabilities. 2011; 32: 345-352.
  63. Yang Y, Conners FA, Merrill EC. Visuo-spatial ability in individuals with Down syndrome: Is it really a strength? Research in Developmental Disabilities. 2014; 35: 1473- 1500.
  64. Bernardino I, Mouga S, Castelo-Branco M, van Asselen M. Egocentric and allocentric spatial representations in Williams syndrome. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society. 2013; 19: 54-62.
  65. Farran EK, Blades M, Boucher J, Tranter L. How do individuals with Williams syndrome learn a route in a real- world environment? Developmental Science. 2010; 13: 454- 468.
  66. Broadbent HJ, Farran EK, Tolmie A. Sequential egocentric navigation and reliance on landmarks in Williams syndrome and typical development. Frontiers in psychology. 2015; 6: 216.
  67. Farran EK, Courbois Y, Van Herwegen J, Blades M. How useful are landmarks when learning a route in a virtual environment? Evidence from typical development and Williams syndrome. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 2012; 111: 571-586.
  68. Courbois Y, Farran EK, Lemahieu A, Blades M, Mengue- Topio H, et al. Wayfinding behaviour in Down syndrome: A study with virtual environments. Research in Developmental Disabilities. 2013; 34: 1825-1831.
  69. Farran EK, Purser HRM, Courbois Y, Ballé M, Sockeel P, et al. Route knowledge and configural knowledge in typical and atypical development: A comparison of sparse and rich environments. Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders. 2015; 7.
  70. Wheeler M, Clark A. Culture, embodiment and genes: Unravelling the triple helix. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2008; 363: 3563- 3575.
  71. Frick A, Möhring W. A Matter of Balance: Motor Control is Related to Children's Spatial and Proportional Reasoning Skills. Frontiers in Psychology. 2016; 6: 2049.
  72. Jansen P, Schmelter A, Kasten L, Heil M. Impaired mental rotation performance in overweight children. Appetite. 2011; 56: 766-769.
  73. Zacks JM. Neuroimaging Studies of Mental Rotation: A Meta-analysis and Review. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 2008; 20: 1-19.
  74. Voyer D, Jansen P. Motor expertise and performance in spatial tasks: A meta-analysis. Human Movement Science. 2017; 54: 110-124.
  75. Pietsch S. The different point of view -A visual-spatial taxonomy for sports. Journal of Athletic Enhancement. 2018; 7: 3.
  76. Bredin J, Kerlirzin Y, Israël I. Path integration: Is there a difference between athletes and non-athletes? Experimental Brain Research. 2005; 167: 670-674.
  77. Popov AG, Paquet N, Lajoie Y. Influence of Gymnastic Background on Triangle Completion Performance in Single and Dual-Task Conditions. The Open Sports Sciences Journal. 2013; 6: 15-21.
  78. McNaughton BL, Battaglia FP, Jensen O, Moser EI, Moser MB. Path integration and the neural basis of the "cognitive map." Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 2006; 7: 663-678.
  79. Malinowski JC. Mental rotation and real-world wayfinding. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 2001; 92: 19-30.
  80. Schmidt M, Egger F, Kieliger M, Rubeli B, Schüler J. Gymnasts and Orienteers Display Better Mental Rotation Performance Than Nonathletes. Journal of Individual Differences. 2016; 37: 1-7.
  81. Roca-González C, Martin Gutierrez J, GarcÍa-Dominguez M, Mato Carrodeguas MDC. Virtual Technologies to Develop Visual-Spatial Ability in Engineering Students. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education. 2017; 13: 441-468.
  82. Feraco T, Bonvento M, Meneghetti C. Orienteering: What relation with visuospatial abilities, wayfinding attitudes, and environment learning? Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2021; 35: 1592-1599.
  83. Meneghetti C, Toffalini E, Lanfranchi S, Roch M, Carretti B. Path Learning in Individuals With Down Syndrome: The Challenge of Learning Condition and Cognitive Abilities. Frontiers in psychology. 2021; 12: 913.
  84. Meneghetti C, Feraco T, Ispiro P, Pietsch S, Jansen P. The practice of judo: how does it relate to different spatial abilities? Spatial Cognition & Computation. 2021; 21: 67-88.
  85. Ishikawa T, Zhou Y. Improving cognitive mapping by training for people with a poor sense of direction. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications. 2020; 5: 1-20.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Meneghetti, C., Miola, L., Feraco, T., & Muffato, V.
Venue
Prime Archives in Environmental Research
Publisher
Vide Leaf, Hyderabad
Published
2022
DOI
10.37247/papsy2ed.2.2022.9
Cited by
5
References
6
Language
en

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