Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27668486›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition2017

Verbalizing, visualizing, and navigating: The effect of strategies on encoding a large-scale virtual environment.

David J M Kraemer, Victor R Schinazi, Philip B Cawkwell, Anand Tekriwal, Russell A Epstein, Sharon L Thompson-Schill

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Grounded understanding of abstract concepts: The case of STEM learning.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2017
    Review
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

David J M KraemerCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania.
Victor R SchinaziCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania.
Philip B CawkwellCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania.
Anand TekriwalCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania.
Russell A EpsteinCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania.
Sharon L Thompson-SchillCenter for Cognitive Neuroscience, Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania.

Funding

Object ConceptsR01EY021717 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI THOMPSONSCHILL, SHARON L · 2011 to 2014
$1.6M
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY021717
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Using novel virtual cities, we investigated the influence of verbal and visual strategies on the encoding of navigation-relevant information in a large-scale virtual environment. In 2 experiments, participants watched videos of routes through 4 virtual cities and were subsequently tested on their memory for observed landmarks and their ability to make judgments regarding the relative directions of the different landmarks along the route. In the first experiment, self-report questionnaires measuring visual and verbal cognitive styles were administered to examine correlations between cognitive styles, landmark recognition, and judgments of relative direction. Results demonstrate a tradeoff in which the verbal cognitive style is more beneficial for recognizing individual landmarks than for judging relative directions between them, whereas the visual cognitive style is more beneficial for judging relative directions than for landmark recognition. In a second experiment, we manipulated the use of verbal and visual strategies by varying task instructions given to separate groups of participants. Results confirm that a verbal strategy benefits landmark memory, whereas a visual strategy benefits judgments of relative direction. The manipulation of strategy by altering task instructions appears to trump individual differences in cognitive style. Taken together, we find that processing different details during route encoding, whether due to individual proclivities (Experiment 1) or task instructions (Experiment 2), results in benefits for different components of navigation-relevant information. These findings also highlight the value of considering multiple sources of individual differences as part of spatial cognition investigations. (PsycINFO Database Record

Indexed as

EnvironmentUser-Computer InterfaceAdolescentAdultAnalysis of VarianceCognitionFemaleHumansIndividualityMaleMemorySpatial NavigationSurveys and QuestionnairesVerbal BehaviorVisual PerceptionYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID27668486
PMCPMC5366277

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.