ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2023
Measuring configural spatial knowledge: Individual differences in correlations between pointing and shortcutting.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Shape configuration of mental targets representation as a holistic measure in a 3D real world pointing test for spatial orientation.Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- Learning the layout of different environments: common or dissociated abilities?Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2025Article
- Stress affects navigation strategies in immersive virtual reality.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
People use environmental knowledge to maintain a sense of direction in daily life. This knowledge is typically measured by having people point to unseen locations (judgments of relative direction) or navigate efficiently in the environment (shortcutting). Some people can estimate directions precisely, while others point randomly. Similarly, some people take shortcuts not experienced during learning, while others mainly follow learned paths. Notably, few studies have directly tested the correlation between pointing and shortcutting performance. We compared pointing and shortcutting in two experiments, one using desktop virtual reality (VR) (N = 57) and one using immersive VR (N = 48). Participants learned a new environment by following a fixed route and were then asked to point to unseen locations and navigate to targets by the shortest path. Participants' performance was clustered into two groups using K-means clustering. One (lower ability) group pointed randomly and showed low internal consistency across trials in pointing, but were able to find efficient routes, and their pointing and efficiency scores were not correlated. The others (higher ability) pointed precisely, navigated by efficient routes, and their pointing and efficiency scores were correlated. These results suggest that with the same egocentric learning experience, the correlation between pointing and shortcutting depends on participants' learning ability, and internal consistency and discriminating power of the measures. Inconsistency and limited discriminating power can lead to low correlations and mask factors driving human variation. Psychometric properties, largely under-reported in spatial cognition, can advance our understanding of individual differences and cognitive processes for complex spatial tasks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.