ArticleJournal of cognition2024
Egocentric and Allocentric Spatial Memory for Body Parts: A Virtual Reality Study.
Article in Journal of cognition, 2024. 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.
- Navigating space and the developing mind.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Review
- Pre-protocol of the Virtual Spatial Configuration Task (VSCT): A Novel Virtual Reality-Based Tool for Assessing Cognitive Map Formation Abilities.Open research Europe · 2025Article
- Editorial "Embodiment in the Metaverse: How Real and Virtual Bodies in Interaction Affect Cognition".Journal of cognition · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Extensive literature elucidated the mechanisms underlying the ability to memorize the positions of objects in space. However, less is known about the impact that objects' features have on spatial memory. The present study aims to investigate differences in egocentric and allocentric object-location memory between hand stimuli depicted in a first-person perspective (1PP) or in a third-person one (3PP). Fifty-two adults encoded spatial positions within a virtual museum environment featuring four square buildings. Each of these buildings featured eight paintings positioned along the walls, with two pictures displayed on each of the four walls. Thirty-two stimuli were employed, which represented pictures of the right hand performing various types of gestures. Half of the stimuli depicted the hand in the 1PP, while the other half depicted the hand in the 3PP. Both free and guided explorations served as encoding conditions. Immediately after that, participants underwent a two-step object-location memory task. Participants were provided with a map of the museum and asked to identify the correct building where the image was located (allocentric memory). Then, they were presented with a schematic representation of the exhibition room divided into four sections and instructed to select the section where they thought the picture was located (egocentric memory). Our findings indicate a memory performance boost associated with egocentric recall, regardless of the perspective of the bodily stimuli. The results are discussed considering the emerging literature on the mnemonic properties of body-related stimuli for spatial memory.
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.