International Journal of Engineering Business
and Social Science
Vol. 1 No. 03, January-February 2023, pages: 136-146
e-ISSN: 2980-4108, p-ISSN: 2980-4272
https://ijebss.ph/index.php/ijebss
136
The Relationship Between Different Types of Learning
Environments and Individual Differences in Navigation Abilities
Mariana Dinah Charlota Lerik
1
, Thomas Dicky Hastjarjo
2
, Rini Dharmastiti
3
1
Faculty of Public Health, University of Nusa Cendana Kupang-NTT, Indonesia
2
Faculty of Psychology, University of Gadjah Mada Yogyakarta, Indonesia
3
Faculty of Engineering, University of Gadjah Mada Yogyakarta, Indonesia
E-Mail: Mdinah.lerik@staf.undana.ac.id
Submitted: 08-02-2023 Revised: 12-02-2023, Publication: 20-02-2023
Keywords
Abstract
Navigation Ability;
Types of Learning
Environments;
Walking Corsi Test;
Wayfinding task;
Learning types
The study attempted to determine the relationship between the different types of
learning environments and the performance in wayfinding tasks. The mixed analysis
was used to analyze the data. The types of learning environments were measured by the
Walking Corsi test while the wayfinding task performance was measured by the travel
time in finding the target location. The wayfinding task performance was measured
three times. Eighty-nine (89) undergraduate students aged between 18-23 years were
divided based on the types of learning environments into 3 groups, namely route
learning type (31 students), map learning type (30 students) and verbal learning type
(28 students). The results showed that there were significant differences in the travel
time to find the target location between three types of environmental learning groups F
(3.6, 172) = 11.040; p<0.01). In the first occasion, the travel time of the map learning
type group was faster than the route learning type group and the verbal learning type
group. In the second occasion to track the target location, the travel time of the map
learning type group was faster than route learning type group and the verbal learning
type group. In the third occasion, the travel time of the map and verbal instruction
learning type group were not different.
1. Introduction
People travel across one place to another every day. They who cross space are called navigators. In order to
find a way to the destination or not get lost, people need three navigation abilities. First, the ability to absorb and
process different (visual, spatial, verbal) information from the environment. Second, the ability to synthesize
different information from the environment into spatial representations or cognitive maps. Third, the ability to use
these cognitive maps to move the body efficiently to approach and achieve goals.
There are abundant studies on individual differences in navigation abilities (Schinazi et al., 2013)(Wiener et
al., 2009). Individual differences in the formation of accurate spatial representations in studies in which the
participants went around the new area by car once a week for ten weeks. Individual differences in the ability to study
the area were measured through sketch drawings of building locations and accuracy points to locations around the
area. There were participants who showed good performance consistently for ten trials and performed less
consistently for ten trials. The consistency of an increase or a decrease in the individual performance also occurs in
the connection of two routes in the fourth and subsequent trials.
137 e-ISSN: 2980-4108 p-ISSN: 2980-4272 IJEBSS
IJEBSS Vol. 1 No.03, January-February 2023, pages: 136-146
The participants involved in Ishikawa and Montello's 2006 study above were passivewhen receiving
environmental exposure (Weisberg et al., 2014). Therefore, Schinazi et al., (2013) conduct a research study that
actively exposes the environment by asking participants to walk across the environment once a week for three weeks
to see the formation of cognitive maps. Schinazi et al., (2013) find that the participants have experienced an increase
in spatial assignments about buildings along the route and have formed accurate spatial representations of the
environment.
A measurement of individual differences is challenging when a researcher wants to conduct a spatial
learning experiment in a new environment. The recent research on the route learning paradigm distinguishes three
strategies for finding a way, namely 1) allocentric place ; 2) egocentric associative sign , and 3) beacon response
(de Condappa & Wiener, 2016). Hölscher et al., (2011) mention the choice of route strategies following the
principles of cognitive economics that greatly adjust to the availability of perceptual information for tasks. Sameer &
Bhushan, (2015) mention the learning of routes and the method of loci in navigation in an unfamiliar environment in
which the route memory is better without a landmark compared to the condition of the landmark imagination.
Landmarks are important for the performance of older adults who are looking for a way (Marquez et al.,
2015). This is also supported by Lingwood et al.,(2015) who find children aged 6, 8, and 10 years experienced an
increase in learning routes with landmarks as a reference. There are two types of environment learning, namely
primary learning and secondary learning. Individuals with primary learning type which is also called route learning
move through the environment directly. Meanwhile, individuals with secondary learning type observe and study
the environment indirectly through a map and or verbal instructions.
Preliminary studies on Indonesian subjects with self-report measurements shows that Indonesian people
used the secondary learning type in a balanced way using maps and verbal instructions (Dinah Charlota Lerik et al.,
2016). The way how primary learning type and secondary learning type influence navigation skills is unidentified.
This study aims to examine differences in navigation capabilities in terms of individual environment learning types.
2. Research Method
Participant
The participants of this study were 89 engineering faculty students aged 18-2 years rom the state university
in Yogyakarta.
Measurement
1. The Walking Corsi Test.The environmental learning type test was adopted from The Walking Corsi Test
developed by Piccardi et al., (2008) as follows:
a. Primary learning: Walking Corsi Test was made in the form of a plastic base measuring 2.5 x 3 m, containing
eight squares that would form a route that could be passed by participants. Guided by a research assistant,
participants walked along the routes consisting of a minimum of three-square route to the maximum of eight-
square route on the plastic mat (Figure 1). If the participants performed correctly, they walked across the four-
square route, but if they did it wrong the participant would be corrected by the research assistant three times
at maximum until it was correct. The same procedure was carried out until the eight-square route. When the
participant managed to walk alone across the eight-square route after being taught by the assistant, the study
session ended and the participants took a break for five minutes in another room. After the break, the
participants were taken back to the room with the display of The Walking Corsi to reproduce the eight-square
route learning one more time. The score was the number square route that the participant has successfully
passed. Scores ranged from 0 - 8.
IJEBSS e-ISSN: 2980-4108 p-ISSN: 2980-4272 138
IJEBSS Vol. 1 No.03, January-February 2023, pages: 136-146
Figure 1.
The Walking Corsi Test display was adopted to measure the types of learning from eight-square route.
b. Secondary learning of maps: The participants were given a map of a three-square route on A4 paper (Figure 2A) to
be studied for four minutes at maximum (following the procedure performed by Piccardi et al., (2008)). The first
map was presented to the participants for 80 seconds and they immediately reproduced correctly the three-square
route on A4 paper (Figure 2B) three times. Then the map was closed and the participants reproduced correctly the
image of the route on the A4 paper three times. The same procedure was carried out until the eight-square route.
After the participants reproduced correctly the image of the eight-square route on the A4 sheet of paper three times,
they took a break for five minutes in another room. Furthermore, they were taken back to the room with the
display of The Walking Corsi Test and then reproduced walking across the eight-square route that had been
studied. The score was the number of boxes that were successfully recalled, ranged from 0-8.
B
A
139 e-ISSN: 2980-4108 p-ISSN: 2980-4272 IJEBSS
IJEBSS Vol. 1 No.03, January-February 2023, pages: 136-146
Picture 2.
2A) Example of a secondary learning stimulus map: an eight-square route is printed on an A4 sheet of paper that
the participants learn. 2B) Outline maps on A4 paper sheets reproduced by the participants
1) Secondary learning verbal instructions: participants were given a verbal stimulus on a three-square route on
A4 paper (Figure 3A) to be studied for eight minutes (the instructions were modified by the author with
reference to the secondary task of the map above). The verbal instruction stimulus for the three-square route
was displayed on the subject for 180 seconds. Then the participants immediately reproduced the three-squares
route by drawing arrows as an analogy to the route on an A4 paper three times. The same thing was also done
in verbal instructions for four-square route, five-square route to eight-square route. Five minutes later, the
participants were taken back to the room with a display of The Walking Corsi Test and reproduced walking
across the eight-square route that had been studied. The score was the number of boxes that were successfully
recalled, 0-8.after learning eight-square route maps.
B
A
Verbal directions for three-squareroute
Please create a route using arrows starting
at a square marked with letter B towards a
square marked with letter C and ending in a
square marked with the letter F
IJEBSS e-ISSN: 2980-4108 p-ISSN: 2980-4272 140
IJEBSS Vol. 1 No.03, January-February 2023, pages: 136-146
Picture 3.
3A) Examples of secondary instructions for verbal learning: a three-square route is printed on an A4 sheet of
paper that the participants learn. 3B) A verbal guidance outline on an A4 sheet of the paper reproduced by the
participants after learning verbal instructions on a three-square route.
2) Navigation Capability was measured in travel time tracing routes in the UGM Faculty of Psychology (Fig. 3)
which was conducted once every week for three consecutive weeks according to the time agreement with
participants.
Procedure
The participants were invited to participate through the google doc link that was shared through whatsapp
application. After registering, they were confirmed to determine the schedule of the data collection. The data
collection was done once a week for three consecutive weeks. They signed an informed consent sheet before being
tested for the type of environmental learning in the laboratory and tracing the route for the first time in the Faculty
of Psychology UGM (see Figure 5). In the second data collection, participants walked based on the same route a
second time. In the third data collection, the same participants traced the route in the Faculty of Psychology UGM for
the third time. The travel time data was recorded as dependent variable measures. The participants received
debriefings about the nature of the study and reward for participating in this study at the end of the meeting.
141 e-ISSN: 2980-4108 p-ISSN: 2980-4272 IJEBSS
IJEBSS Vol. 1 No.03, January-February 2023, pages: 136-146
Figure 5. Map of space and route that is passed for travel time measurement Analysis The statistical
analysis technique used in this study was a 3x3 mixed analysis of variance.
3. Results and Discussions
The analysis result shows that there are significant differences in the average of travel time of tracking the
route three times for three consecutive weeks in the three types of learning environment (see table 1). The average of
travel time of tracking the first route is the route learning type group (M = 780.3; SD = 78.7) different from the map
type (M = 771; SD = 103.4), the map type is faster. Route type (M = 780.3; SD = 78.7) is different from the type of
verbal instructions (M = 855.6; SD = 122), route type is faster. The map type (M = 771, SD = 103.4) is different
from the type of verbal instructions (M = 855.6; SD = 122), the map type is faster. The average of travel time of
tracking the second route is the route learning type group (M = 752.3; SD = 69.7) different from the map type (M =
689.8; SD = 77.3), the map type was faster. Route type (M = 752.3; SD = 69.7) is different from the type of verbal
instructions (M = 702.4; SD = 100.1), the type of verbal guidance is faster. Map type (M = 689.8, SD = 77.3) is
different from the type of verbal instructions (M = 702.4; SD = 100.1), the map type is faster. The average of travel
time of tracking the third route is the route learning type group (M = 705; SD = 69) different from the map type (M =
644; SD = 74), the map type is faster. Route type (M = 705; SD = 69) is different from the type of verbal instructions
(M = 645; SD = 83), the type of verbal instructions is faster. The map type (M = 644, SD = 74) is similar to the
verbal type (M = 645; SD = 83).
Table 1.
Descriptive Statistics
Group
Mean
N
Time 1
1.00
780.2581
31
2.00
771.7000
30
3.00
855.6429
28
Total
801.0899
89
Time 2
1.00
752.2581
31
2.00
689.8000
30
3.00
702.3929
28
Total
715.5169
89
Time 3
1.00
704.9677
31
2.00
643.8667
30
3.00
644.6429
28
Total
665.3933
89
The results of the simultaneous analysis (see table.3) shows that there are significant differences in the three
repetitive measurement times which are reviewed from the three types of learning environments F (3.6, 172) =
11,040; p <0.05; ƞ2 p = 0.204) in which the F value commonly used is a Greenhouse-Geisser. Therefore, there is an
interaction between travel time of tracking the route (1,2,3) and the types of learning environment (route, map and
verbal instructions). Changes in the first, second third-travel time scores in the learning type group (routes, maps, and
verbal instructions) are significantly different.
The travel time of tracking the route for the first to the second travel time in the learning type group has
decreased insignificantly with the average difference (MD = 28,000; p> 0.05). There is a significant decrease in the
changes in travel time of tracking the route in the second until the second time with average difference (MD =
47.290; p <0.05; ƞ2 p = 0.218). The travel time of tracking the route from the first, second until third time in the
map learning type group experience a significant decrease with the average difference (MD = 81,900; 45,933; p
<0,05; ƞ2 p = 0,387) Meanwhile The travel time of tracking the route from the first, second, until third time in the
IJEBSS e-ISSN: 2980-4108 p-ISSN: 2980-4272 142
IJEBSS Vol. 1 No.03, January-February 2023, pages: 136-146
group learning type verbal instructions experience a significant decrease with the average difference (MD = 153,250;
57,750; p <0.05; ƞ2 p = 0.614).
The plot shows the significant drop of the line in the decrease in the travel time of tracking the route. The
sharp decline occurs in the first travel time to the second travel time in the verbal type group. The plot shows the
overlapping line in the third travel time in the group of map type and verbal type.
Table 3
Tests of Within-Subjects Effects
Source
Df
Mean
Square
F
Sig.
Partial Eta
Squared
Time
Sphericity
Assumed
2
433571.21
5
113.166
.000
.568
Greenhouse-
Geisser
1.788
484995.83
6
113.166
.000
.568
Huynh-Feldt
1.866
464745.70
1
113.166
.000
.568
Lower-bound
1.000
867142.42
9
113.166
.000
.568
time *
Group
Sphericity
Assumed
4
42296.351
11.040
.000
.204
Greenhouse-
Geisser
3.576
47312.999
11.040
.000
.204
Huynh-Feldt
3.732
45337.529
11.040
.000
.204
Lower-bound
2.000
84592.703
11.040
.000
.204
Error(ti
me)
Sphericity
Assumed
172
3831.298
Greenhouse-
Geisser
153.763
4285.718
Huynh-Feldt
160.462
4106.775
Lower-bound
86.000
7662.597
Pairwise Comparisons
Measure: MEASURE 1
Group
(I) Waktu
(J) Waktu
Mean
Differences
(I-J)
Std Error
Sig
a
95% Convidence Interval
for difference
a
Lower
Bound
Upper
bound
1.00
1
2
28.000
16.882
.101
-5.559
61.559
3
75.290*
17.156
.000
41.185
109.395
2
1
-28.000
16.882
.101
-61.559
5.559
3
47.290*
17.737
.000
21.971
72.610
3
1
-75.290*
17.156
.000
-109.395
-41.185
2
-47.290*
17.737
.000
-72.610
21.971
2.00
1
2
81.900*
17.161
.000
47.786
116.014
3
127.833*
17.440
.000
93.165
162.502
2
1
-81.900*
17.161
.000
-116.014
-47.786
3
45.933*
12.947
.001
20.195
71.672
3
1
-127.833*
17.440
.000
-162.502
-93.165
2
-45.933*
12.947
.001
-71.672
-20.195
3.00
1
2
153.250*
17.763
.000
117.938
188.562
3
211.000*
18.052
.000
175.114
246.886
143 e-ISSN: 2980-4108 p-ISSN: 2980-4272 IJEBSS
IJEBSS Vol. 1 No.03, January-February 2023, pages: 136-146
2
1
-153.250*
17.763
.000
-188.562
-117.938
3
57.750*
13.402
.000
31.108
84.392
3
1
-211.000*
18.052
.000
-246.886
-175.114
2
-57.750*
13.402
.000
-84.392
-31.108
Based on estimated maginal means
* the means difference is significant at the 0.50 level
a Adjustment for multiple comparisons least significant difference (equivalent to no adjustments)
Research Discussion
This study aims to determine the role of the type of learning environment in navigation ability has been shown
to differ significantly based on the results of mixed variance analysis. This means that there are individuals who have
the potential to learn the route (Head & Isom, 2010). There are individuals who have the potential to learn maps
better and there are also individuals who study the environment with better verbal guidance. After the primary
learning occurs, individuals get a free spatial orientation that can be accessed from various directions. The map type
group has learned a new environment by utilizing the new environmental map in tracking the route to find the
specified location (Xiao et al., 2015). Verbal type groups have learned new environment by forming spatial
representations of verbal clues when tracking the route to find specified locations. Map and verbal groups are also
called to have experienced secondary learning which has strengthened special orientation spatial representations,
which are easier to access one-way learning instead of other directions.
These results support the model of spatial knowledge result which state that spatial performance in retracking
the route and completing the route are the result of route representation in cognitive map. This cognitive map is in
the form of an internal representation of the environment, for example, the sequence of signs encountered along the
route passed and physical movement along with the environment or survey representation, for example, a two-
dimensional representation of the environmental configuration. Cognitive map distinguishes individuals in all three
types of environmental learning groups sourced from:
(a) The process of coding spatial information from the sensory which absorbs the stimulation of types of learning
routes, maps, and verbal instructions as well as signs in the environment. The route type group gets stimulation to
learn a new environment by walking along the route with the assistant. The map type group gets stimulation of
learning the environment from the map. The verbal type group gets stimulation of learning a new environment
from verbal instructions. Environmental stimulation in the form of prominent signs such as stand-up frames,
upward directions, eleven stairs, UKP receptionists, evacuation routes, boards of lecture hall, west staircase iron
time
321
Estimated Marginal Means
900.00
850.00
800.00
750.00
700.00
650.00
600.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
Group
Estimated Marginal Means of MEASURE_1
IJEBSS e-ISSN: 2980-4108 p-ISSN: 2980-4272 144
IJEBSS Vol. 1 No.03, January-February 2023, pages: 136-146
gates, and book shit banners. These signs become a stimulus that is perceived by the individuals. Visual senses
are the main sensory tools for absorbing the spatial layout of an environment. However, when the individuals
move through a real environment, they also perceive their own movements through non-visual senses. Movement
is sensed by the vestibular system providing the information on linear and angular acceleration, and kinesthesis,
which identifying limb movements, and repeats movements based on signals from the central nervous system to
muscles.
(b) The process of maintaining internal representations of high-quality information to construct cognitive maps
requires the role of memory. Memory has an essential role in learning the environment because environmental
space cannot be captured only by a single view, and spatial space needs to be studied by managing information
continuously. Memory construction formed from exposure to an environment is also a source of individual
differences. Information can also be stored in memory as the direction of the route or as a configuration. Spatial
memory also differs in metric accuracy. Spatial memory has an essential role in drawing conclusions about space
memory.
(c) The process of drawing conclusions from new information in spatial memory and then transforming spatial
information into spatial performance. When individuals learn spatial layouts of large-scale environments, they
pass through the environment in the order of viewpoints along with movements through the environment. The
memory of view sequences and the of movement sequences are not enough to perform tasks such as estimation
of distance in a straight line and estimation of direction between signs found in a sequence of routes. Therefore,
the performance of task estimation and distance estimation requires drawing conclusions from the information
perceived at that time.
Individual differences also occur due to a repetition of environmental exposure or familiarity (Dijkstra et al.,
2014) through retracking the route once a week for three consecutive weeks (Schinazi et al., 2013). When the
familiarity and the environmental exposure increase, there is a relative continual increase and quantity, accuracy
and completeness of spatial knowledge.
Exposure to the new environment is seen in the first longest travel time because knowledge of the new
spatial environment acquired has not been stable. the second environmental exposure is seen in changes in travel
time decrease because new spatial knowledge begins to be stored in memory. The third environmental exposure
with the fastest travel time proves that stable spatial knowledge has been formed or called survey knowledge.
Primary learning is when individuals move directly through the environment and secondary learning is
when individuals observe and study the environment indirectly through maps or verbal clues. Differences in
environmental learning are based on the number of positions that give the advantage to individuals in learning.
Maps and verbal instructions are seen as the only one advantageous position and they are easy to be used only in
one subsequent orientation. On the contrary, direct routes provide various advantageous positions for individuals.
Various orientation positions facilitate the use of spatial information in the orientation variations. Secondary
learning types, namely the type of map and verbal instructions are faster than the primary learning type, namely
the type of route in re-tracking the route. Individuals with map learning type are faster than the route type in
finding locations. Learning type of verbal instructions is faster than the route type. Individuals with map learning
type have similar learning speed with individuals with verbal instructions type.
The results also show that repetition of the one-time weekly route for three consecutive weeks has an impact
on familiarity (Marchette et al., 2011) (Iachini et al., 2009) which results in a decrease in the speed of the third
travel time. Familiarity in this research is carried out in a real environment in line with the results of research
familiarity in the virtual environment conducted by Dijkstra et al., (2014).
This research shows important results based on plots where maps and verbal instructions are equivalent
tools as a source of new environmental learning information in the formation of individual cognitive maps which
are then used to find locations (Meilinger & Knauff, 2008). There are differences especially in terms of depiction.
The results of our research which do not differ can be explained as a result of the number of samples that have
met the significant requirements of the independent t-test.
145 e-ISSN: 2980-4108 p-ISSN: 2980-4272 IJEBSS
IJEBSS Vol. 1 No.03, January-February 2023, pages: 136-146
Our findings are in line with the findings of other studies that find no difference between map and verbal in
time and error that equivalent performance levels indicate that the navigator rotates the map mentally to suit the
environment where "above" on the map is suitable for "advancing" in the environment. Another possible reason
is depiction or drawing forces participants to store spatial information that may not be relevant if they find the
appropriate location during the navigation. Memory needs in managing all spatial relations of the map may
consume cognitive resource. Therefore, it is better to rotate the map. Conversely, verbal instructions are very
useful but depend on the quality as well. Therefore, the verbal instructions used in this research are made as
closely as possible with the environment map to get a description of the best environmental routes.
4. Conclusion
From the study, it can be concluded that there are significant differences in the average of travel time of
tracking the route three times for three consecutive weeks in the three types of learning environment. The results
of the simultaneous analysis shows that there are significant differences in the three repetitive measurement times
which are reviewed from the three types of learning environments F (3.6, 172) = 11,040; p <0.05; ƞ2 p = 0.204)
in which the F value commonly used is a Greenhouse-Geisser (Leech et al., 2013). This study aims to determine
the role of the type of learning environment in navigation ability has been shown to differ significantly based on
the results of mixed variance analysis. These results support the model of spatial knowledge result which states
that spatial performance in re-tracking the route and completing the route are the result of route representation in
cognitive map.
5. References
de Condappa, O., & Wiener, J. M. (2016). Human place and response learning: navigation strategy selection, pupil
size and gaze behavior. Psychological Research, 80, 82–93.
Dijkstra, J., de Vries, B., & Jessurun, J. (2014). Wayfinding search strategies and matching familiarity in the built
environment through virtual navigation. Transportation Research Procedia, 2, 141–148.
Dinah Charlota Lerik, M., Hastjarjo, T. D., & Dharmastiti, R. (2016). Sex Differences and Emotion in Wayfinding:
Using a Map or Verbal Direction (a Pilot Study). Applied Psychology Readings: Selected Papers from
Singapore Conference on Applied Psychology, 2016, 63–74.
Head, D., & Isom, M. (2010). Age effects on wayfinding and route learning skills. Behavioural Brain Research,
209(1), 49–58.
Hölscher, C., Tenbrink, T., & Wiener, J. M. (2011). Would you follow your own route description? Cognitive
strategies in urban route planning. Cognition, 121(2), 228–247.
Iachini, T., Ruotolo, F., & Ruggiero, G. (2009). The effects of familiarity and gender on spatial representation.
Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(2), 227–234.
Leech, N., Barrett, K., & Morgan, G. A. (2013). SPSS for intermediate statistics: Use and interpretation. Routledge.
Lingwood, J., Blades, M., Farran, E. K., Courbois, Y., & Matthews, D. (2015). The development of wayfinding
abilities in children: Learning routes with and without landmarks. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 41,
74–80.
Marchette, S. A., Bakker, A., & Shelton, A. L. (2011). Cognitive mappers to creatures of habit: differential
engagement of place and response learning mechanisms predicts human navigational behavior. Journal of
Neuroscience, 31(43), 15264–15268.
Marquez, J. J., Downey, A., & Clement, R. (2015). Walking a mile in the user’s shoes: Customer journey mapping as
IJEBSS e-ISSN: 2980-4108 p-ISSN: 2980-4272 146
IJEBSS Vol. 1 No.03, January-February 2023, pages: 136-146
a method to understanding the user experience. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 20(3–4), 135–150.
Meilinger, T., & Knauff, M. (2008). Ask for directions or use a map: A field experiment on spatial orientation and
wayfinding in an urban environment. Journal of Spatial Science, 53(2), 13–23.
Piccardi, L., Iaria, G., Ricci, M., Bianchini, F., Zompanti, L., & Guariglia, C. (2008). Walking in the Corsi test:
which type of memory do you need? Neuroscience Letters, 432(2), 127–131.
Sameer, A., & Bhushan, B. (2015). Route memory in an unfamiliar homogeneous environment: a comparison of two
strategies. Cognitive Processing, 16, 149–152.
Schinazi, V. R., Nardi, D., Newcombe, N. S., Shipley, T. F., & Epstein, R. A. (2013). Hippocampal size predicts
rapid learning of a cognitive map in humans. Hippocampus, 23(6), 515–528.
Weisberg, S. M., Schinazi, V. R., Newcombe, N. S., Shipley, T. F., & Epstein, R. A. (2014). Variations in cognitive
maps: understanding individual differences in navigation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory, and Cognition, 40(3), 669.
Wiener, J. M., Büchner, S. J., & Hölscher, C. (2009). Taxonomy of human wayfinding tasks: A knowledge-based
approach. Spatial Cognition & Computation, 9(2), 152–165.
Xiao, C., Lian, Y., & Hegarty, M. (2015). Spatial updating of map-acquired representation. Memory & Cognition,
43, 1032–1042.
© 2023 by the authors. Submitted
for possible open access publication
under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY SA) license
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/).