ArticleScientific reports2025
Challenges and insights of transferring animal maze studies principles to human spatial learning research.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Maze tasks, originally developed in animal research, have become a popular method for studying human cognition, particularly with the advent of virtual reality. However, these experiments frequently rely on simplified environments and tasks, which may not accurately reflect the complexity of real-world situations. Our pilot study aims to transfer a multi-alternative maze with a complex task structure, previously demonstrated to be useful in studying animal cognition, to studying human spatial cognition. The challenges to be resolved at this stage included developing a virtual maze and selecting an appropriate instruction that will elicit processes similar to those observed in animal models. A virtual maze was developed, and two types of instructions were provided to the participants: (1) to collect coins; (2) to interact with the maze in order to draw its structure after the game. The results indicate that a more structured instruction with a clear attainable goal ("collect") prompted more in-depth exploration and engagement with the key elements of the maze, eliciting processes similar to those of animals. While the maze demonstrates promise as a tool for comparative studies, it also has the potential to uncover different aspects of human cognition.
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.