ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2025
Individual differences in navigation skill: towards reliable and valid measures.
Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2025. 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.
- Article
- Virtual Reality-Based Orienteering Training Improves Spatial Memory in College Students with Operationally Defined DTD-like Navigational Difficulties: fNIRS Correlates of Training-Related Cortical Adaptation.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Do spatial navigation and episodic memory rely on the same systems? Evidence from a naturalistic experience with children and adults.Journal of experimental psychology. General · 2025Article
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
Even though successful navigation is vital for survival, individuals vary widely in their navigation skills. Researchers have examined the correlates of such variation using a wide variety of paradigms. However, we know little about the relation among the paradigms used, and their validity for real-world behaviors. In this study, we assessed 94 young adult participants' encoding of environmental features in one real-world and two virtual environments (or paradigms), using a within-subjects design. Each paradigm involved building a map from memory and pointing to the location of objects while standing at different locations in the environment. Two of the paradigms also used a route efficiency task in which participants aimed to take the shortest possible path to a target object. Factor analysis showed shared and unique variance in individual's performance associated with each paradigm. Mental rotation and perspective taking tasks correlated with navigation performance differently for different paradigms. The data suggest that (1) virtual measures correlate with real-world ones, (2) the specific tasks used (pointing, map building, shortest route finding) are less important than the paradigm, and (3) there is common variance (i.e., shared individual differences) across paradigms. However, there is also unique paradigm-specific variation. Future research should use multiple paradigms to achieve reliable and valid assessments, ideally with shorter tasks for each.
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.