001     139395
005     20240321220618.0
024 7 _ |a 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2017.04.003
|2 doi
024 7 _ |a pmid:28478330
|2 pmid
024 7 _ |a 0010-0285
|2 ISSN
024 7 _ |a 1095-5623
|2 ISSN
024 7 _ |a altmetric:19872489
|2 altmetric
037 _ _ |a DZNE-2020-05717
041 _ _ |a English
082 _ _ |a 150
100 1 _ |a Chen, Xiaoli
|0 P:(DE-2719)2811255
|b 0
|e First author
|u dzne
245 _ _ |a Cue combination in human spatial navigation.
260 _ _ |a Amsterdam
|c 2017
|b Elsevier
264 _ 1 |3 print
|2 Crossref
|b Elsevier BV
|c 2017-06-01
336 7 _ |a article
|2 DRIVER
336 7 _ |a Output Types/Journal article
|2 DataCite
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|b journal
|m journal
|0 PUB:(DE-HGF)16
|s 1710344351_30570
|2 PUB:(DE-HGF)
336 7 _ |a ARTICLE
|2 BibTeX
336 7 _ |a JOURNAL_ARTICLE
|2 ORCID
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|0 0
|2 EndNote
520 _ _ |a This project investigated the ways in which visual cues and bodily cues from self-motion are combined in spatial navigation. Participants completed a homing task in an immersive virtual environment. In Experiments 1A and 1B, the reliability of visual cues and self-motion cues was manipulated independently and within-participants. Results showed that participants weighted visual cues and self-motion cues based on their relative reliability and integrated these two cue types optimally or near-optimally according to Bayesian principles under most conditions. In Experiment 2, the stability of visual cues was manipulated across trials. Results indicated that cue instability affected cue weights indirectly by influencing cue reliability. Experiment 3 was designed to mislead participants about cue reliability by providing distorted feedback on the accuracy of their performance. Participants received feedback that their performance with visual cues was better and that their performance with self-motion cues was worse than it actually was or received the inverse feedback. Positive feedback on the accuracy of performance with a given cue improved the relative precision of performance with that cue. Bayesian principles still held for the most part. Experiment 4 examined the relations among the variability of performance, rated confidence in performance, cue weights, and spatial abilities. Participants took part in the homing task over two days and rated confidence in their performance after every trial. Cue relative confidence and cue relative reliability had unique contributions to observed cue weights. The variability of performance was less stable than rated confidence over time. Participants with higher mental rotation scores performed relatively better with self-motion cues than visual cues. Across all four experiments, consistent correlations were found between observed weights assigned to cues and relative reliability of cues, demonstrating that the cue-weighting process followed Bayesian principles. Results also pointed to the important role of subjective evaluation of performance in the cue-weighting process and led to a new conceptualization of cue reliability in human spatial navigation.
536 _ _ |a 344 - Clinical and Health Care Research (POF3-344)
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-344
|c POF3-344
|f POF III
|x 0
542 _ _ |i 2017-06-01
|2 Crossref
|u https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/
542 _ _ |i 2018-05-04
|2 Crossref
|u http://www.elsevier.com/open-access/userlicense/1.0/
588 _ _ |a Dataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed,
650 _ 2 |a Adult
|2 MeSH
650 _ 2 |a Cues
|2 MeSH
650 _ 2 |a Feedback, Psychological: physiology
|2 MeSH
650 _ 2 |a Humans
|2 MeSH
650 _ 2 |a Psychomotor Performance: physiology
|2 MeSH
650 _ 2 |a Spatial Navigation: physiology
|2 MeSH
650 _ 2 |a Young Adult
|2 MeSH
700 1 _ |a McNamara, Timothy P
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 1
700 1 _ |a Kelly, Jonathan W
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 2
700 1 _ |a Wolbers, Thomas
|0 P:(DE-2719)2810583
|b 3
|e Last author
|u dzne
773 1 8 |a 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2017.04.003
|b : Elsevier BV, 2017-06-01
|p 105-144
|3 journal-article
|2 Crossref
|t Cognitive Psychology
|v 95
|y 2017
|x 0010-0285
773 _ _ |a 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2017.04.003
|g Vol. 95, p. 105 - 144
|0 PERI:(DE-600)1462875-2
|q 95<105 - 144
|p 105-144
|t Cognitive psychology
|v 95
|y 2017
|x 0010-0285
856 4 _ |u https://pub.dzne.de/record/139395/files/DZNE-2020-05717_Restricted.pdf
856 4 _ |u https://pub.dzne.de/record/139395/files/DZNE-2020-05717_Restricted.pdf?subformat=pdfa
|x pdfa
909 C O |p VDB
|o oai:pub.dzne.de:139395
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen
|0 I:(DE-588)1065079516
|k DZNE
|b 0
|6 P:(DE-2719)2811255
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen
|0 I:(DE-588)1065079516
|k DZNE
|b 3
|6 P:(DE-2719)2810583
913 1 _ |a DE-HGF
|b Gesundheit
|l Erkrankungen des Nervensystems
|1 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-340
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-344
|3 G:(DE-HGF)POF3
|2 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-300
|4 G:(DE-HGF)POF
|v Clinical and Health Care Research
|x 0
914 1 _ |y 2017
915 _ _ |a Nationallizenz
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0420
|2 StatID
|d 2023-03-30
|w ger
915 _ _ |a JCR
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0100
|2 StatID
|b COGNITIVE PSYCHOL : 2021
|d 2023-03-30
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0200
|2 StatID
|b SCOPUS
|d 2023-03-30
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0300
|2 StatID
|b Medline
|d 2023-03-30
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0600
|2 StatID
|b Ebsco Academic Search
|d 2023-03-30
915 _ _ |a Peer Review
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0030
|2 StatID
|b ASC
|d 2023-03-30
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0199
|2 StatID
|b Clarivate Analytics Master Journal List
|d 2023-03-30
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1180
|2 StatID
|b Current Contents - Social and Behavioral Sciences
|d 2023-03-30
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0150
|2 StatID
|b Web of Science Core Collection
|d 2023-03-30
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0130
|2 StatID
|b Social Sciences Citation Index
|d 2023-03-30
915 _ _ |a IF < 5
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)9900
|2 StatID
|d 2023-03-30
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-2719)1310002
|k AG Wolbers
|l Aging, Cognition and Technology
|x 0
980 _ _ |a journal
980 _ _ |a VDB
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-2719)1310002
980 _ _ |a UNRESTRICTED


LibraryCollectionCLSMajorCLSMinorLanguageAuthor
Marc 21