ReviewWiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science
Collaborative Wayfinding: A Critical Review.
Review in Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science. 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.
- Collaborative Wayfinding: A Critical Review.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive scienceReview
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
Abstract
Though people can navigate alone, collaborative wayfinding is ubiquitous in human life. Use of GPS devices does not inevitably make it easy to navigate together: conflict in collaborative wayfinding is familiar to most of us, as is failure at it. Yet we know little about how people find their way together. What mechanisms and conditions support effective group dynamics and performance? What difference does a shared history make in grounding communication and decision-making in wayfinding? Only in the last few years have these questions started to be addressed, but recent developments have come from separate disciplines in a disparate way, both methodologically and theoretically. We critically review recent experimental work. We then draw lessons from five mature fields in the study of collaborative cognition: social ontology, distributed cognition, transactive memory, group problem-solving, and collaborative recall. Sometimes, navigating together effectively depends on jointly remembering spatial information encoded together during earlier joint action. We suggest tractable designs to identify shared spatial knowledge and assess collaborative process gains and losses, alongside better methods to tap the microprocesses of embodied interaction in small groups remembering routes together. We suggest ways to test for emergence in collaborative wayfinding, and to assess varying divisions of cognitive labor in groups with matching or competing spatial capacities or strategies.
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.