ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. General2024
The format of the cognitive map depends on the structure of the environment.
Article in Journal of experimental psychology. General, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Consolidation of cognitive maps as a gradual process.Experimental brain research · 2026Article
- Divide (evenly) and conquer (quickly): Spatial exploration behaviors predict navigational learning and differ by sex.Cognition · 2025Article
- Individual differences in navigation skill: towards reliable and valid measures.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2025Article
- Learning the layout of different environments: common or dissociated abilities?Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2025Article
- Investigating the different domains of environmental knowledge acquired from virtual navigation and their relationship to cognitive factors and wayfinding inclinations.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2023Article
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
Humans and animals form cognitive maps that allow them to navigate through large-scale environments. Here we address a central unresolved question about these maps: whether they exhibit similar characteristics across all environments, or-alternatively-whether different environments yield different types of maps. To investigate this question, we examined spatial learning in three virtual environments: an open courtyard with patios connected by paths (open maze), a set of rooms connected by corridors (closed maze), and a set of isolated rooms connected only by teleporters (teleport maze). All three environments shared the same underlying topological graph structure. Postlearning tests showed that participants formed representations of the three environments that varied in accuracy, format, and individual variability. The open maze was most accurately remembered, followed by the closed maze, and then the teleport maze. In the open maze, most participants developed representations that reflected the Euclidean structure of the space, whereas in the teleport maze, most participants constructed representations that aligned more closely with a mental model of an interconnected graph. In the closed maze, substantial individual variability emerged, with some participants forming Euclidean representations and others forming graph-like representations. These results indicate that an environment's features shape the quality and nature of the spatial representations formed within it, determining whether spatial knowledge takes a Euclidean or graph-like format. Consequently, experimental findings obtained in any single environment may not generalize to others with different features. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
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.