{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029422066549912435, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010683012259194396, 'mean_word_length': 5.4024663677130045, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 2, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Influence of Route Planning and its Execution on Spatial Learning

The Influence of Route Planning and its Execution on Spatial Learning Kayoko Ohtsu (id-ant@moegi.waseda.jp) Graduate School of Education, Waseda University, 1-6-1, Nishi Waseda, Shinjuku-ku Tokyo, Japan Yoshihiro Ouchi (oouchi@teikyo-gjc.ac.jp) Teikyo-Gakuen Junior College, 615-1, Kobutizawa-cho, Hokuto City, Yamanashi, Japan Abstract We propose that spatial inferences made during planning and executing a route influence the learning of relative locations through wayfinding. In Experiment 1, separate and combined route plans were compared. The results suggest that inferring multiple directions during the initial stage of planning leads to more accurate representations of relative locations than planning a single route. In Experiment 2, regular and irregular updating modes during the execution phase were compared. The results suggest that irregular updating, which involves multidirectional self-to-object updating, also leads to more accurate representations than regular updating. We conclude that the requirement to make spatial inferences about multiple multidirectional metric interconnections in egocentric reference frames during wayfinding facilitates spatial learning. Keywords: spatial learning; route planning; wayfinding; egocentric reference frames Introduction The means by which humans and animals develop knowledge about their surrounding environments has been a controversial topic for a long time. One theory of the development of spatial knowledge assumes a qualitative change from route knowledge to survey-type knowledge over time (Siegel & White, 1975), and thus the knowledge should become more elaborate as experiences of traveling increase. It is also thought that the qualitative change could occur by automatic and unconscious reorganization of the route knowledge (Thorndyke & Hayes-Roth, 1982). However, there are studies that showed that experiences of an environment do not facilitate spatial learning automatically (Moeser, 1988; Rossano & Reardon, 1999), and repetitive learning does not always efficiently promote the accurate development of knowledge (Ishikawa & Montello, 2006). The present study examines the relationship between human spatial learning and route planning during wayfinding. Though wayfinding includes a wide range of cognitive activities and behaviors (Garling, Book, & Lindberg, 1984), after a destination has been set the basic process of wayfinding is planning and executing of a route in which one decides on and follows between a point of origin and a destination (Golledge, 1999). Specifically, we focused on route planning when moving through environmental spaces such as cities or the interior of buildings. In previous studies, route planning, which incorporates factors such as “short cuts”, is often used as a dependent variable that changes with the development of spatial cognition. However, to our knowledge, no study has yet examined the effects of route planning on spatial learning. Here we assume that spatial inferences during planning and executing a route facilitate the learning of relative locations. This might sound paradoxical because knowledge of relative locations is often thought to be a precondition for planning. Spiers & Maguire (2008) pointed out that when planning a route, the relative direction from the origin to the destination is determined before a specific path can be chosen. In the case when very little is known about a particular environment, how is it possible to find the way to a destination that is out of sight? Given that, to facilitate wayfinding, spatial knowledge of a particular environment is manipulated using rules of inference (Kuipers, 1978). A relative direction must be inferred by representing and manipulating the incomplete knowledge that has already been acquired. For example, when one is not sure which path to take at a four-way intersection in an unfamiliar environment, he or she can express a vague direction to a destination by pointing a finger, which is a spatial inference that people make routinely in their daily lives. The core idea in this study is that the inference of this type will be effective to develop spatial knowledge. The relationship between relative locations can be described in either an environmental reference frame (object-to-object relations) or an egocentric reference frame (self-to-object relations). However, when deciding on a direction of movement within an environment during wayfinding, it is necessary for a traveler to represent one’s body and the destination in an egocentric reference frame (Sholl, 1996) in order to translate one’s spatial knowledge into action. On theoretical grounds, self-to-object relations can be represented in a number of ways, for example, as location-dependent reference direction (Poucet, 1993) or in a network of reference frames (Meilinger, 2008). However, the representations commonly contain metric information, defined as the direction and distance from one place to another. Our expectation was that spatial inferences about self-to- object metric relations would have a facilitating effect when planning a route and updating self-position and orientation at the decision point (e.g. intersections). Garling et al. (1984) suggested that metrical relations only between important reference points are represented for travel. Naturally, an origin and a destination are such reference points for determining a route at the initial stage. In addition, the decision point should also be the key reference point for following the route. Unlike on-line-type spatial inferences such as narrowly defined path integration, which are based