Different “routes” to a cognitive map: dissociable forms of spatial knowledge derived from route and cartographic map learning
Open accessAbstract
An important, but as yet incompletely resolved, issue is whether spatial knowledge acquired during navigation differs significantly from that acquired by studying a cartographic map. This, in turn, is relevant to understanding the generalizability of the concept of a "cognitive map," which is often likened to a cartographic map. On the basis of previous theoretical proposals, we hypothesized that route and cartographic map learning would produce differences in the dynamics of acquisition of landmark-referenced (allocentric) knowledge, relative to view-referenced (egocentric) knowledge. We compared this model with competing predictions from two other models linked to route versus map learning. To test these ideas, participants repeatedly performed a judgment of relative direction (JRD) and a scene- and orientation-dependent pointing (SOP) task while undergoing route and cartographic map learning of virtual spatial environments. In Experiment 1, we found that map learning led to significantly faster improvements in JRD pointing accuracy than did route learning. In Experiment 2, in contrast, we found that route learning led to more immediate and greater improvements overall in SOP accuracy, as compared to map learning. Comparing Experiments 1 and 2, we found a significant three-way interaction effect, indicating that improvements in performance differed for the JRD versus the SOP task as a function of route versus map learning. We interpreted these findings as suggesting that the learning modality differentially affects the dynamics of how we utilize primarily landmark-referenced versus view-referenced knowledge, suggesting potential differences in how we utilize spatial representations acquired from routes versus cartographic maps.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
There is evidence that overlapping yet distinctive brain regions are involved with egocentric and allocentric encoding of spatial information (Zhang et al., 2014).
“There is evidence that overlapping yet distinctive brain regions are involved with egocentric and allocentric encoding of spatial information (Zhang et al., 2014).”
From Does viewing a top-down map facilitate spatial learning from navigation in a virtual environment? (2026) · cites this paper as Zhang et al., 2014
The Introduction’s “overlapping model” section reports that fMRI studies found largely overlapping brain areas following route and survey learning. But the “dual systems” section cautions that route/survey learning is not necessarily equivalent to egocentric/allocentric representation, and the cited passage does not establish distinctive brain regions for egocentric versus allocentric encoding. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe SOP and JRD tasks are thought to be dependent on egocentric and allocentric representations, respectively.
“The SOP and JRD tasks are thought to be dependent on egocentric and allocentric representations, respectively (Zhang et al., 2014).”
From Does viewing a top-down map facilitate spatial learning from navigation in a virtual environment? (2026) · cites this paper as Zhang et al., 2014
Zhang et al. (2014) and Meilinger et al. (2015) found that spatial knowledge acquired through map viewing produced more benefit for allocentric spatial judgments, while first-person navigation contributed more toward egocentric spatial judgments.
“Both Zhang et al. (2014) and Meilinger et al. (2015) found that spatial knowledge acquired through map viewing produced more benefit for allocentric spatial judgments, while first-person navigation contributed more toward egocentric spatial judgments.”
From Does viewing a top-down map facilitate spatial learning from navigation in a virtual environment? (2026) · cites this paper as Zhang et al. (2014)
Some studies comparing spatial learning from maps and first-person navigation found that these two learning methods had different effects on allocentric and egocentric spatial judgments.
“Some studies have compared spatial learning from studying maps and first-person navigation and found that these two learning methods had different effects on allocentric and egocentric spatial judgments (Meilinger et al., 2015; Starrett et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2014).”
From Does viewing a top-down map facilitate spatial learning from navigation in a virtual environment? (2026) · cites this paper as Zhang et al., 2014
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 61 · Cited by 80
- Authors
- Zhang, H., Zherdeva, K., & Ekstrom, A. D.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Davis (US)
- University of California System (US)
- Corresponding author
- Ekstrom, Arne D.
- Venue
- Memory & Cognition
- Published
- 2014-05-21
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1106-1117
- ISSN
- 0090-502X (ISSN-L)
- 1532-5946
- PMC
- PMC4169750
- OpenAlex
- W2123472547
- Cited by
- 80
- References
- 61
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3
- FWCI
- 4.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Memory & Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS076856)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Social Sciences › Geography, Planning and Development › Geography Education and Pedagogy
- Keywords
- cognitive maps, route learning, spatial knowledge, landmark-based navigation, view-based navigation, virtual worlds, learning modalities, spatial representation
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Space Perception, Spatial Memory, Spatial Learning, Spatial Navigation
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