移动导航因素对寻路绩效及空间知识获取的影响

doi:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240607

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 研究探索移动导航因素（导航模式、比例尺）对个体虚拟3D环境下寻路绩效与空间知识获取的影响。研究1建立了适用于虚拟场景寻路的空间知识分类测量任务;研究2在研究1的基础上考察了不同导航因素组合对个体寻路与加工环境知识的影响。结果发现：在路线知识的学习上,男性使用固定模式地图的表现显著好于使用旋转模式地图,女性则相反;在大比例尺地图上,旋转视角比固定视角更有利于学习路线知识,小比例尺地图则相反;寻路绩效存在导航模式的主效应,旋转模式下被试寻路绩效更高。研究结果揭示了导航模式和比例尺的交互作用：导航因素组合若有助于个体建立一致的空间参考框架,将提升对路线知识的获取效果。

关键词: 寻路绩效, 空间认知, 移动导航, 空间知识

Abstract: Wayfinding is a crucial process for individuals to navigate and explore their environment in daily life. Compared to the traditional use of paper maps, modern navigation aids have been found to hinder individuals' spatial knowledge of their environment. Previous research has shown that navigation factors, such as navigation mode and scale, impact how individuals perceive and process spatial information. For example, the user-aligned mode helps individuals form an egocentric representation of space, while the north-on-top mode promotes the formation of an allocentric representation. Additionally, small-scale maps assist in establishing spatial relationships between objects using an allocentric representation, while large-scale maps provide a perspective of nearby space, facilitating an egocentric representation. However, there is a trade-off between wayfinding performance and spatial knowledge acquisition. To address this trade-off, this study aims to investigate which combination of navigation factors best supports spatial knowledge acquisition. Previous research has limitations, such as not controlling for scale as an independent variable and lacking a measurement task that assesses all three types of spatial knowledge. To address these gaps, this study established a measurement task for each type of spatial knowledge and used two scales (1:50 and 1:200) as independent variables, while continuing to include the commonly-studied north-on-top and user-aligned modes. The aim of this research was to investigate the impact of mobile navigation factors (navigation mode, scale) on individuals' wayfinding performance and spatial knowledge acquisition in a virtual 3D environment, considering the factor of gender.
In Experiment 1, 96 participants (48 males, 48 females) were recruited. Participants were first required to complete a virtual spatial task consisting of two phases: wayfinding and return. After completing all ten routes, the participants were required to complete the spatial knowledge test, which consisted of five tasks such as landmark recognition and route sequencing tasks. The scores from these tests were collected and analyzed, and three factors were extracted using factor analysis. Building on the typical measurement task defined in Experiment 1, Experiment 2 employed a 2 (scale: small scale 1:200, large scale 1:50) x 2 (navigation mode: user-aligned mode, north-on-top mode) x 2 (gender: male, female) between-subjects design. The dependent variables in this experiment were participants' scores on the spatial knowledge measurement task and wayfinding performance. The number of participants was 96 (calculated by G-power), and the experimental procedure was the same as in Experiment 1. Experiment 2 revealed the following: there were significant interactions between gender and navigation mode in route knowledge acquisition. Specifically, males performed significantly better in the north-on-top mode compared to the user-aligned mode, while the opposite was true for females. On large-scale maps, the user-aligned mode was more conducive to route knowledge acquisition than the north-on-top mode, aligning with an egocentric representation. Conversely, on small-scale maps, the north-on-top mode was more convenient than the user-aligned mode, aligning with an allocentric representation. A main effect of navigation modes on wayfinding performance was observed, with subjects' wayfinding performance being better in the user-aligned mode than in the north-on-top mode. The results of both experiments indicated an interaction between navigation mode and scale: combinations of navigation factors that suit the individual can help individuals establish a consistent spatial frame of reference, thereby enhancing the acquisition of route knowledge.
The innovations of this article are as follows. First, this study has refined the spatial knowledge measurement task and established a comprehensive measurement task for three types of spatial knowledge, thus providing new ideas on how to reduce measurement errors and conduct measurements systematically and efficiently. Second, based on the spatial reference framework theory, this study found that the influence of mobile navigation factors on spatial knowledge learning and wayfinding performance is conditional. When navigation factors facilitate individuals to process environmental information with a consistent reference framework, it promotes the acquisition of route knowledge.

Key words: wayfinding performance, spatial cognition, mobile navigation, spatial knowledg

江予, 韩雪辰, 李慧敏, 吴佳鑫, 房慧聪. 移动导航因素对寻路绩效及空间知识获取的影响[J]. 心理科学, 2024, 47(6): 1351-1362.

Jiang Yu, Han Xuechen, Li Huimin, Wu Jiaxin, Fang Huicong. The Effect of Mobile Navigation Factors on Wayfinding Performance and Spatial Knowledge Acquisition[J]. Journal of Psychological Science, 2024, 47(6): 1351-1362.

参考文献

[1] 成静, 张涛, 王涛, 董占伟. (2018). 一种基于图复杂度的移动导航服务回归测试优先方法. 计算机科学, 45(6), 141-144, 155.
[2] 杨林腾. (2020). 移动导航使用对环境空间认知及寻路绩效的影响 (硕士学位论文). 华东师范大学, 上海.
[3] 张凤翔, 陈美璇, 蒲艺, 孔祥祯. (2023). 空间导航能力个体差异的多层次形成机制. 心理科学进展, 31(9), 1642-1664.
[4] Bellana B., Liu Z. X., Diamond N. B., Grady C. L., & Moscovitch M. (2017). Similarities and differences in the default mode network across rest, retrieval, and future imagining. Human Brain Mapping, 38(3), 1155-1171.
[5] Bicanski, A., & Burgess, N. (2018). A neural-level model of spatial memory and imagery. eLife, 7, Article e33752.
[6] Boone A. P., Gong X. Y., & Hegarty M. (2018). Sex differences in navigation strategy and efficiency. Memory and Cognition, 46(6), 909-922.
[7] Bottini, R., & Doeller, C. F. (2020). Knowledge across reference frames: Cognitive maps and image spaces. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24(8), 606-619.
[8] Brown A., Burles F., Iaria G., Einstein G., & Moscovitch M. (2023). Sex and menstrual cycle influence human spatial navigation strategies and performance. Scientific Reports, 13(1), Article 14953.
[9] Brunec I. K., Bellana B., Ozubko J. D., Man V., Robin J., Liu Z. X., & Moscovitch M. (2018). Multiple scales of representation along the hippocampal anteroposterior axis in humans. Current Biology, 28(13), 2129-2135.e6.
[10] Brunec I. K., Robin J., Patai E. Z., Ozubko J. D., Javadi A. H., Barense M. D., & Moscovitch M. (2019). Cognitive mapping style relates to posterior-anterior hippocampal volume ratio. Hippocampus, 29(8), 748-754.
[11] Burgess, N. (2006). Spatial memory: How egocentric and allocentric combine. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(12), 551-557.
[12] Burgess N., Maguire E. A., & O’Keefe J. (2002). The human hippocampus and spatial and episodic memory. Neuron, 35(4), 625-641.
[13] Chen H. Y., Sato K., & Zheng M. C. (2021). Differences in wayfinding performance across types of navigation aids and understanding of environmental information among travelers. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 20(4), 383-397.
[14] Chen J. Y., Li N., Shi Y. M., & Du J. (2023). Cross-cultural assessment of the effect of spatial information on firefighters' wayfinding performance: A virtual reality-based study. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 84, Article 103486.
[15] Cheng B. J., Lin E. R., Wunderlich A., Gramann K., & Fabrikant S. I. (2023). Using spontaneous eye blink-related brain activity to investigate cognitive load during mobile map-assisted navigation. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 17, Article 1024583.
[16] Chiang N. C. R., Huang S. C. L., Kuo N. F., & Shih C. C. (2023). Understanding cognitive maps from landmark and configurational representations. Learning and Motivation, 83, Article 101910.
[17] Coutrot A., Schmidt S., Coutrot L., Pittman J., Hong L., Wiener J. M., & Spiers H. J. (2019). Virtual navigation tested on a mobile app is predictive of real-world wayfinding navigation performance. PLoS ONE, 14(3), Article e0213272.
[18] Dahmani, L., & Bohbot, V. D. (2020). Habitual use of GPS negatively impacts spatial memory during self-guided navigation. Scientific Reports, 10(1), Article 6310.
[19] Dong W. H., Qin T., Yang T. Y., Liao H., Liu B., Meng L. Q., & Liu Y. (2022). Wayfinding behavior and spatial knowledge acquisition: Are they the same in virtual reality and in real-world environments? Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 112(1), 226-246.
[20] Duckham, M., & Kulik, L. (2003). “Simplest” paths: Automated route selection for navigation. In W. Kuhn, M. F. Worboys, & S. Timpf (Eds.), Spatial information theory: Foundations of geographic information science (pp. 169-185). Springer.
[21] Ericson, J. D., & Warren, W. H. (2020). Probing the invariant structure of spatial knowledge: Support for the cognitive graph hypothesis. Cognition, 200, Article 104276.
[22] Farran E. K., Bowler A., Karmiloff-Smith A., D’Souza H., Mayall L., & Hill E. L. (2019). Cross-domain associations between motor ability, independent exploration, and large-scale spatial navigation; attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, Williams syndrome, and typical development. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 13, Article 225.
[23] Gardony A. L., Brunyé T. T., & Taylor H. A. (2015). Navigational aids and spatial memory impairment: The role of divided attention. Spatial Cognition and Computation, 15(4), 246-284.
[24] Gramann K., Hoepner P., & Karrer-Gauss K. (2017). Modified navigation instructions for spatial navigation assistance systems lead to incidental spatial learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 193.
[25] He Q. L., McNamara T. P., Bodenheimer B., & Klippel A. (2019). Acquisition and transfer of spatial knowledge during wayfinding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45(8), 1364-1386.
[26] Head, D., & Isom, M. (2010). Age effects on wayfinding and route learning skills. Behavioural Brain Research, 209(1), 49-58.
[27] Hejtmánek L., Oravcová I., Motýl J., Horáček J., & Fajnerová I. (2018). Spatial knowledge impairment after GPS guided navigation: Eye-tracking study in a virtual town. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 116, 15-24.
[28] Hilton C., Kapaj A., & Fabrikant S. I. (2023). Landmark sequence learning from real-world route navigation and the impact of navigation aid Visualisation style. Journal of Cognition, 6(1), Article 41.
[29] Iachini T., Ruotolo F., Rapuano M., Sbordone F. L., & Ruggiero G. (2023). The role of temporal order in egocentric and Allocentric spatial representations. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 12(3), Article 1132.
[30] Isaacson, M., & Shoval, N. (2006). Application of tracking technologies to the study of pedestrian spatial behavior. The Professional Geographer, 58(2), 172-183.
[31] Ishikawa, T., & Montello, D. R. (2006). Spatial knowledge acquisition from direct experience in the environment: Individual differences in the development of metric knowledge and the integration of separately learned places. Cognitive Psychology, 52(2), 93-129.
[32] Ishikawa, T., & Takahashi, K. (2014). Relationships between methods for presenting information on navigation tools and users' wayfinding behavior. Cartographic Perspectives, 75, 17-28.
[33] Janzen, G. (2006). Memory for object location and route direction in virtual large-scale space. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(3), 493-508.
[34] Krukar J., Anacta V. J., & Schwering A. (2020). The effect of orientation instructions on the recall and reuse of route and survey elements in wayfinding descriptions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 68, Article 101407.
[35] Krukar J., Navas Medrano S., & Schwering A. (2023). Route effects in city-based survey knowledge estimates. Cognitive Processing, 24(2), 213-231.
[36] Laczó M., Martinkovic L., Lerch O., Wiener J. M., Kalinova J., Matuskova V., & Laczó J. (2022). Different profiles of spatial navigation deficits in Alzheimer' s disease biomarker-positive versus biomarker-negative older adults with amnestic mild cognitive impairment. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 14, Article 886778.
[37] Lapeyre B., Hourlier S., Servantie X., N' Kaoua B., & Sauzéon H. (2011). Using the landmark-route-survey framework to evaluate spatial knowledge obtained from synthetic vision systems. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 53(6), 647-661.
[38] Lawton, C. A. (1994). Gender differences in way-finding strategies: Relationship to spatial ability and spatial anxiety. Sex Roles, 30(11-12), 765-779.
[39] Löwen H., Krukar J., & Schwering A. (2019). Spatial learning with orientation maps: The influence of different environmental features on spatial knowledge acquisition. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 8(3), Article 149.
[40] Lugli L., Ragni M., Piccardi L., & Nori R. (2017). Hypermedia navigation: Differences between spatial cognitive styles. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 191-200.
[41] Malinowski, J. C., & Gillespie, W. T. (2001). Individual differences in performance on a large-scale, real-world wayfinding task. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(1), 73-82.
[42] McNamara T. P., Rump B., & Werner S. (2003). Egocentric and geocentric frames of reference in memory of large-scale space. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10(3), 589-595.
[43] Merrill E. C., Yang Y. Y., Roskos B., & Steele S. (2016). Sex differences in using spatial and verbal abilities influence route learning performance in a virtual environment: A comparison of 6- to 12-year old boys and girls. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 258.
[44] Montello, D. R. (1993). Scale and multiple psychologies of space. In A. U. Frank & I. Campari (Eds.), Spatial information theory: A theoretical basis for GIS ( pp. 312-321). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
[45] Morag, I., & Pintelon, L. (2021). Digital wayfinding systems in hospitals: A qualitative evaluation based on managerial perceptions and considerations before and after implementation. Applied Ergonomics, 90, Article 103260.
[46] Munion A. K., Stefanucci J. K., Rovira E., Squire P., & Hendricks M. (2019). Gender differences in spatial navigation: Characterizing wayfinding behaviors. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 26(6), 1933-1940.
[47] Münzer S., Lörch L., & Frankenstein J. (2020). Wayfinding and acquisition of spatial knowledge with navigation assistance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 26(1), 73-88.
[48] Münzer S., Zimmer H. D., & Baus J. (2012). Navigation assistance: A trade-off between wayfinding support and configural learning support. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 18(1), 18-37.
[49] Nazareth A., Huang X., Voyer D., & Newcombe N. (2019). A meta-analysis of sex differences in human navigation skills. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 26(5), 1503-1528.
[50] Nori, R., & Giusberti, F. (2006). Predicting cognitive styles from spatial abilities. The American Journal of Psychology, 119(1), 67-86.
[51] Ohtsu, K. (2017). Spatial learning by egocentric updating during wayfinding in a real middle-scale environment: Effects of differences in route planning and following. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 50, 51-59.
[52] Peer M., Brunec I. K., Newcombe N. S., & Epstein R. A. (2021). Structuring knowledge with cognitive maps and cognitive graphs. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25(1), 37-54.
[53] Puthusseryppady V., Morrissey S., Spiers H., Patel M., & Hornberger M. (2022). Predicting real world spatial disorientation in Alzheimer' s disease patients using virtual reality navigation tests. Scientific Reports, 12(1), Article 13397.
[54] Richter, K. F. (2007). A uniform handling of different landmark types in route directions. In S. Winter, M. Duckham, L. Kulik, & B. Kuipers (Eds.), Spatial information theory ( pp. 373-389). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
[55] Richter, K. F., & Duckham, M. (2008). Simplest instructions: Finding easy-to-describe routes for navigation. In T. J. Cova, H. J. Miller, K. Beard, A. U. Frank, & M. F. Goodchild (Eds.), Geographic information science (pp. 274-289). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
[56] Ruggiero G., Ruotolo F., & Iachini T. (2022). How ageing and blindness affect egocentric and allocentric spatial memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75(9), 1628-1642.
[57] Ruginski I. T., Creem-Regehr S. H., Stefanucci J. K., & Cashdan E. (2019). GPS use negatively affects environmental learning through spatial transformation abilities. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 64, 12-20.
[58] Ruotolo F., Ruggiero G., Raemaekers M., Iachini T., van Der Ham, I. J. M., Fracasso A., & Postma A. (2019). Neural correlates of egocentric and allocentric frames of reference combined with metric and non-metric spatial relations. Neuroscience, 409, 235-252.
[59] Schwering A., Krukar J., Li R., Anacta V. J., & Fuest S. (2017). Wayfinding through orientation. Spatial Cognition and Computation, 17(4), 273-303.
[60] Siegel, A. W., & White, S. H. (1975). The development of spatial representations of large-scale environments. Advances in child development and behavior. Elsevier.
[61] Slone E., Burles F., Robinson K., Levy R. M., & Iaria G. (2015). Floor plan connectivity influences wayfinding performance in virtual environments. Environment and Behavior, 47(9), 1024-1053.
[62] von Stülpnagel, R., & Steffens, M. C. (2012). Can active navigation be as good as driving? A comparison of spatial memory in drivers and backseat drivers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 18(2), 162-177.
[63] Willis K. S., Hölscher C., Wilbertz G., & Li C. (2009). A comparison of spatial knowledge acquisition with maps and mobile maps. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 33(2), 100-110.
[64] Witmer B. G., Bailey J. H., Knerr B. W., & Parsons K. C. (1996). Virtual spaces and real world places: Transfer of route knowledge. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45(4), 413-428.
[65] Wolbers, T., & Wiener, J. M. (2014). Challenges for identifying the neural mechanisms that support spatial navigation: The impact of spatial scale. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, Article 571.
[66] Yang, Y. Y., & Merrill, E. C. (2022). Wayfinding in children: A descriptive literature review of research methods. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 183(6), 580-608.
[67] Zhao J. Y., Simpson M., Wallgrün J. O., Sajjadi P., & Klippel A. (2020). Exploring the effects of geographic scale on spatial learning. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 5(1), Article 14.
[68] Zhong, J. Y., & Kozhevnikov, M. (2016). Relating allocentric and egocentric survey-based representations to the self-reported use of a navigation strategy of egocentric spatial updating. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 46, 154-175.