Article
Menshikova G.Ya., Savelyeva O.A., Kovyazina M.S. (2018) Assessing successful reproduction of egocentric and allocentric spatial representations using virtual reality National Psychological Journal, [Natsional’nyy psikhologicheskiy zhurnal], 11(2), 113–122
Abstract
Background. Currently in psychological rehabilitation the necessity of developing innovative methods for testing cognitive dysfunctions with via the modern sophisticated technology is becoming increasingly important. One of the urgent requests is associated with developing the methods of diagnostics and correction of spatial representations disorders, which are manifested by decreasing accuracy of spatial representations of the environment in particular.
Objective. To study this issue the method for evaluating the accuracy of spatial information using which the ability to memorize the three-dimensional complex scenes was developed. It was assumed that the accuracy of reproduction would differ significantly depending on the coordinate (egocentric or allocentric) system of mental reconstruction processing.
Design. The library of virtual objects and six unique virtual scenes were created. Each scene of seven objects was shown to the participants within the interval for 25 seconds. Thirty six subjects (aged from 18 to 26) participated in the experiment. They were told to memorize the objects and their locations, and then to reproduce the memorized scene using the given viewpoint of the scene. Three viewpoints were chosen: the "front" (to reproduce the scene from the egocentric position); the "left" and the" above" (to reproduce the memorized scene from on the left and above imaginary allocentric positions, respectively). To perform the task the participants chose objects from the library of virtual objects using the flystick 2 and placed them in virtual space in accordance with the memorized scene. The object locations in virtual space were recorded. Moreover, the accuracy of egocentric and allocentric representations in terms of measurements, topology and depth parameters were calculated.
Conclusion. The results show that the egocentric representations (the "front" viewpoint) were more accurate for all parameters in comparison with the allocentric representations (the "left" and the "above" viewpoints), and the “above” representations were more accurate compared with the “left” ones. The topological accuracy was much better than the measurements and depth accuracy. Regardless of the viewpoints, the topological space parameters are stored in memory much more accurately than the depth parameters, which, in turn, are reproduced more accurately than metric parameters. It was also shown that the accuracy of spatial representations differs for different allocentric viewpoints: the "above" view is reproduced much more accurately than the "left" view.
The method developed made it possible to reveal the features of encoding spatial information in ER and AP blocks in terms of measurements, topology and depth parameters. It can be used in clinical rehabilitation to test impairments in the perception of space, and also violations of short-term memory. The results obtained allow refining the existing models of encoding spatial information.
Accepted: 11/19/2017
Pages: 113-122
DOI: 10.11621/npj.2018.0212
PDF: Download
Keywords: short-term memory; accuracy of spatial representation cording; egocentric and allocentric systems; technology of virtual reality; CAVE;
Available Online 01.08.2018
Fig. 1. Encoding spatial information in the allocentric (left) and egocentric (right) blocks of spatial memory.
Fig. 2. General VR CAVE view.
Fig. 3. Successful object identification using the given viewpoint.
Fig. 4. Successful pinpointing of object location by topology parameters (mid grey),measurements (light grey) and depth (dark grey) depending on the angle type.
Table. 1. Mean values of P-probability and SD-standard deviations of the "successful object identification" variable.
|
Successful Object Identification Viewpoint |
P |
SD |
|
Front |
0.94 |
0.11 |
|
Left |
0.91 |
0.11 |
|
Above |
0.93 |
0.09 |
Table 2. Mean value of successful P-pinpointing and SD-standard deviations of «successful pinpointing of object location by topology, measurements and depth» variables.
|
Successful pinpointing of object location Viewpoint |
Topology |
Measurements |
Depth |
|||
|
P |
D |
P |
D |
P |
SD |
|
|
Front |
0,90 |
0,16 |
0,48 |
0,25 |
0,52 |
0,21 |
|
Left |
0,79 |
0,19 |
0,44 |
0,23 |
0,42 |
0,17 |
|
Right |
0,68 |
0,21 |
0,40 |
0,21 |
0,30 |
0,12 |
References
Burgess, N. (2006) Spatial memory: How egocentric and allocentric combine. Trends Cogn. Sci, 10(12), 551–557. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.10.005
Coluccia, E., Iouse, G., & Brandimonte, M. (2007) The relationship between map drawing and spatial orientation abilities: A study of gender differences. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27, 135–144. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.12.005
Craik, F.I.M., & Lockhart, R.S. (1972) Levels of processing: A frame work for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14-18.
Diwadkar, V.A., & McNamara, T.P. (1997) Viewpoint dependence in scene recognition. Psychological Science. 8, 302–307. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997. tb00442.x
Dobrushina, O.R., Varako, N.A., & Kovyazina, M.S. (2016) Integration of neurofeedback into holistic model of neurorehabilitation. , 22(S2). doi: 10.1017/ S1355617717000030
Filimon, F. (2015) Are all spatial reference frames egocentric? Reinterpreting evidence for allocentric, object-centered, or world-centered reference frames. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9 (648), 1–21. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00648
Gardner, H., Kornhaber, M.L., & Wake, W.K. (1996) Intelligence: Multiple Perspectives. Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 351.
Klatzky, R.L. (1998) Allocentric and egocentric spatial representations: definitions, distinctions and interconnections. Spat.Cogn, 1404, 1–17. doi: 10.1007/3-540-69342-4_1
Kosslyn, S.M., Thompson, W.L., & Ganis, G. (2006) The case for mental imagery. New York: Oxford University Press. Chicago. doi: 10.1093/acprof:o so/9780195179088.001.0001
Kovyazina, M.S., Varako, N.A., & Rasskazova, E.I. (2017) Psychological aspects of the problem of rehabilitation [Voprosy psikhologii], 3, 40–50.
Marr, D. Sight (1987) Information approach to the study of representation and processing of visual images. Moscow, Radio and Communication, 400.
Menshikova, G.Ya., Tetereva, A.O., & Pestun, M.V. (2014) Influence of affective factors on the formation of cognitive maps of space. [Estestvenno-nauchnyy podkhod v sovremennoy psikhologii]. Moscow, Izdatel’stvovo «Institut psikhologii RAN», 542–548.
Menshikova, G.Ya., Kovalev, A.I., Klimova, O.A., & Barabanschikova, V.V. (2017) The application of virtual reality technology to test the motion sickness resistance. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 10(3), 151–164. doi: 10.11621/pir.2017.0310
Miller, G. (1956) The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97. doi: 10.1037/h0043158
Naisser, U. (1981) Cognition and Reality. Moscow, Progress, 230.
Posner, M.I., & Boies, S.J. (1971) Components of attention. Psychological Review, 78(5), 391–408. doi: 10.1037/h0031333
Richardson, J.T.E. (2006) Mental images: a cognitive approach. Moscow, Kogito-Tsenter, 175.
Rinck, M., & Denis, M. (2004) The metrics of spatial distance traversed during mental imagery. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 30, 1211–1218. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.30.6.1211
Shepard, R.N., & Chipman, S. (1970) Second-order isomorphism of internal representation: shapes of states. Cogn. Psychol, 1, 1–17. doi: 10.1016/0010- 0285(70)90002-2
Shepard, R.N., & Metzler, J. (1971) Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 171, 701–703. doi: 10.1126/science.171.3972.701
Smith, J.W. (2015) Immersive Virtual Environment Technology to Supplement Environmental Perception, Preference and Behavior Research: A Review with Applications. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 12, 11486–11505. doi: 10.3390/ijerph120911486
Tolman, E.С. (1948) Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review, 55, 189–208. doi: 10.1037/h0061626
Thurstone, L.L. (1924) The Stimulus-Response Fallacy in psychology. In The Nature of Intelligence. London: Kegan paul, Trench Trubner&Co., 1–23. doi: 10.1037/11388-001
Tversky, B. (1992) Distortions in cognitive maps. Geoforum, 23(2), 131–138. doi: 10.1016/0016-7185(92)90011-R
Vekker, L.M. (1998) Psychic and reality: a unified theory of mental processes. Moscow, Smysl, 685.
Velichkovsky, B.M., Blinnikova, I.V., & Lapin, E.A. Representation of real and imaginary space. [Voprosy psikhologii],. 3, 103–113.
Velichkovsky, B.M. (2006) Cognitive science: the basis of the psychology of cognition. In 2 vols. Vol. 2. Moscow, Akademiya, 432.
Wang, R.F., & Spelke, E.S. (2000) Updating egocentric representations in human navigation. Cognition, 77, 215–250. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00105-0
Wang, R.F., & Spelke, E.S. (2002) Human spatial representation: insights from animals. Trends in cognitive sciences, 6(9), 376–382. doi: 10.1016/S1364- 6613(02)01961-7
Zinchenko, Yu.P., Menshikova, G.Ya., Bayakovsky, Yu.M., Chernorizov, A.M., & Voiskunsky, A.E. (2010) Virtual reality technologies: methodological aspects, achievements and prospects. National Psychological Journal, 1 (3), 54–62.
Zinchenko, Yu.P., Kovalev, A.I., Menshikova, G.Ya., & Shaigerova, L.A. (2015) Postnonclassical methodology and application of virtual reality technologies in social research. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 8(4), 60–71. doi: 10.11621/pir.2015.0405For citing this article:
Menshikova G.Ya., Savelyeva O.A., Kovyazina M.S. (2018) Assessing successful reproduction of egocentric and allocentric spatial representations using virtual reality National Psychological Journal, [Natsional’nyy psikhologicheskiy zhurnal], 11(2), 113–122
