Landmark Distance Impacts the Overshadowing Effect in Spatial Learning Using a Virtual Water Maze Task with Healthy Adults.
cue competition
memory
overshadowing
spatial learning
virtual water maze
Journal
Brain sciences
ISSN: 2076-3425
Titre abrégé: Brain Sci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101598646
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 Sep 2023
05 Sep 2023
Historique:
received:
02
08
2023
revised:
28
08
2023
accepted:
01
09
2023
medline:
28
9
2023
pubmed:
28
9
2023
entrez:
28
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Cue competition is a key element of many associative theories of learning. Overshadowing, an important aspect of cue competition, is a phenomenon in which learning about a cue is reduced when it is accompanied by a second cue. Overshadowing has been observed across many domains, but there has been limited investigation of overshadowing in human spatial learning. This experiment explored overshadowing using two landmarks/cues (at different distances to the goal) in a virtual water maze task with young, healthy adult participants. Experiment 1 initially examined whether the cues used were equally salient. Results indicated that both gained equal control over performance. In experiment 2, overshadowing was examined using the two cues from experiment 1. Results indicated that overshadowing occurred during spatial learning and that the near cue controlled searching significantly more than the far cue. Furthermore, the far cue appeared to have been completely ignored, suggesting that learning strategies requiring the least amount of effort were employed by participants. Evidence supporting an associative account of human spatial navigation and the influence of proximal cues was discussed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37759887
pii: brainsci13091287
doi: 10.3390/brainsci13091287
pmc: PMC10526441
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Psychon Bull Rev. 2013 Dec;20(6):1033-54
pubmed: 23456412
J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2011 Jan;37(1):121-6
pubmed: 20853982
Cognition. 2021 Sep;214:104802
pubmed: 34225248
Learn Behav. 2011 Dec;39(4):324-35
pubmed: 21472414
J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2006 Jul;32(3):339-44
pubmed: 16834501
J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1995 Apr;21(2):166-81
pubmed: 7738499
Psychol Rev. 1948 Jul;55(4):189-208
pubmed: 18870876
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2010 Aug;63(8):1552-67
pubmed: 20119881
Ann Neurosci. 2010 Jul;17(3):136-41
pubmed: 25205891
Nat Neurosci. 2017 Oct 26;20(11):1434-1447
pubmed: 29073641
Learn Behav. 2013 Jun;41(2):179-91
pubmed: 23180188
J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1997 Jan;23(1):110-8
pubmed: 9008865
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2022 Mar;48(3):321-347
pubmed: 35389725
J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2007 Jul;33(3):191-212
pubmed: 17620021
Front Behav Neurosci. 2017 Jun 06;11:109
pubmed: 28634446
Cognition. 2020 Jul;200:104253
pubmed: 32192981
J Neurosci Methods. 1984 May;11(1):47-60
pubmed: 6471907
Psychol Rev. 1987 Jan;94(1):61-73
pubmed: 3823305
Psychol Rev. 1994 Oct;101(4):587-607
pubmed: 7984708
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2019 Feb;72(2):251-262
pubmed: 29516770
Behav Neurosci. 2010 Oct;124(5):623-32
pubmed: 20939662
Rev Neurosci. 2018 Feb 23;29(2):183-197
pubmed: 28889120
Nat Rev Neurol. 2018 Aug;14(8):496-506
pubmed: 29980763
Behav Processes. 2018 Dec;157:102-105
pubmed: 30253200
J Exp Biol. 1996 Jan;199(Pt 1):219-24
pubmed: 8576693
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2014 Sep;9(5):579-84
pubmed: 26186759
Behav Res Methods. 2020 Jun;52(3):1189-1207
pubmed: 31637666
Arch Ital Biol. 1997 Jan;135(1):73-92
pubmed: 9139584
Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2023 Apr;98:62-79
pubmed: 36863222
Behav Processes. 2015 Jul;116:17-27
pubmed: 25921836
Behav Processes. 2011 Sep;88(1):20-6
pubmed: 21736927
Psychon Bull Rev. 2005 Oct;12(5):945-9
pubmed: 16524015