{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026615969581749048, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.388349514563107, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Building spatial representations through primary and secondary learning.

The current study examined the conditions under which cognitive representations of spatial information are stored in orientation-specific ways (like pictures) versus orientation-free ways. College students learned simple paths by viewing a map of them (map condition), by walking them while blindfolded (walk condition), or by directly viewing the route from a single vantage point (look condition). Blindfolded subjects then stood on the route in various orientations and made directional judgments to other locations on the route. When subjects learned the route by indirect, symbolic means (map), judgments were quite easy when aligned with the learned map orientation and were difficult if the judgment was not aligned with the learned map orientation. However, when subjects learned the route by more direct, primary spatial learning (walk or look), there were no alignment effects. Thus, subjects treat information from primary (direct) and secondary (symbolic) spatial learning in distinct ways. Learning from a map results in a figural representation that has great precision but a specific orientation. Learning the route more directly results in a representation that is less precise but one that can be used in more flexible ways.