ArticleExperimental brain research2019
Does spatial cognitive style affect how navigational strategy is planned?
Article in Experimental brain research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Imagery and Verbal Strategies in Spatial Memory for Route and Survey Descriptions.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- The Effect of Cognitive Style on Individual Differences in Prismatic Adaptation: A Pilot Study.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Do Advanced Spatial Strategies Depend on the Number of Flight Hours? The Case of Military Pilots.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- The Role of Gender and Familiarity in a Modified Version of the Almeria Boxes Room Spatial Task.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- CBInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
- Spatial Mental Transformation Skills Discriminate Fitness to Drive in Young and Old Adults.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Travel Planning Ability in Right Brain-Damaged Patients: Two Case Reports.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
People orient themselves in the environment using three different, hierarchically organized, spatial cognitive styles: landmark, route, and survey. Landmark style is based on a representation encompassing only visual information (terrain features); route style is based on a representation that connects landmarks and routes using an egocentric (body-centred) frame of reference; survey style is based on a global map-like representation that mainly involves an allocentric (world-centred) frame of reference. This study was aimed at investigating whether individual spatial cognitive style affected the way to plan a path when searching for a lost object. Participants with landmark, route, and survey style were assessed with an ecological navigational planning task (the Key Search Task), which required planning a strategy to search for the lost key in a hypothetical wide squared field. Results showed that spatial cognitive styles were associated to different navigational planning strategies, although the time to complete the Key Search Task was comparable across the styles. As revealed by the Key Search Task score, survey style individuals were the best navigational planners, route style individuals were less efficient and landmark style individuals were the least efficient. These results suggest that spatial cognitive style has effects on navigational planning. Implications for clinical settings, such as for developmental topographical disorientation, are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31332472What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.