ArticleBrain sciences2025
Equidistant Landmarks Fail to Produce the Blocking Effect in Spatial Learning Using a Virtual Water Maze Task with Healthy Adults: A Role for Cognitive Mapping?
Article in Brain sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesCue competition is a feature of associative learning, whereby during learning, cues compete with each other, based on their relative salience, to influence subsequent performance. Blocking is a feature of cue competition where prior knowledge of a cue (X) will interfere with the subsequent learning of a second cue (XY). When tested with the second cue (Y) alone, participants show an impairment in responding. While blocking has been observed across many domains, including spatial learning, previous research has raised questions regarding replication and the conditions necessary for it to occur. Furthermore, two prominent spatial learning theories predict contrary results for blocking. Associative learning accounts predict that the addition of a cue will lead to a blocking effect and impaired performance upon testing. Whereas the cognitive map theory suggests that the novel cue will be integrated into a map with no subsequent impairment in performance.
methodsUsing a virtual water maze task, we investigated the blocking effect in human participants.
resultsResults indicated that the cue learned in phase 1 of the experiment did not interfere with learning of a subsequent cue introduced in phase 2.
conclusionsThis suggests that blocking did not occur and supports a cognitive mapping approach in human spatial learning. However, the relative location of the cues relative to the goal and how this might determine the learning strategy used by participants was discussed.
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.