Egocentric and Exocentric Spatial Judgements of Visual Displacement

Reframing spatial frames of reference: What can aging tell us about egocentric and allocentric navigation?

Representations of space in mind are crucial for navigation, facilitating processes such as remembering landmark locations, understanding spatial relationships between objects, and integrating routes. A significant problem, however, is the lack of consensus on how these representations are encoded and stored in memory. Specifically, the nature of egocentric and allocentric frames of reference in human memory is widely debated. Yet, in recent investigations of the spatial domain across the lifespan, these distinctions in mnemonic spatial frames of reference have identified age-related impairments. In this review, we survey the ways in which different terms related to spatial representations in memory have been operationalized in past aging research and suggest a taxonomy to provide a common language for future investigations and theoretical discussion. This article is categorized under: Psychology > Memory Neuroscience > Cognition Psychology > Development and Aging.

Asymmetrical Switch Costs in Spatial Reference Frames Switching

Previous studies found that the egocentric and allocentric reference frames are distinct in their functions, developmental trajectory, and neural basis. However, these two spatial reference frames exist in parallel, and people switch between them frequently in their daily lives. Using an allocentric and egocentric switching task, this study explored the cognitive processes involved in the switch between egocentric and allocentric reference frames and the possible asymmetry of switch costs. Sixty-two participants were tested in congruent (i.e., the target was on the same side in two reference frames) and incongruent conditions (i.e., the target was on a different side in two reference frames). The results indicated that the interaction between allocentric and egocentric reference frames was bidirectional and that the congruency effect was higher in the egocentric task than in the allocentric task. More important, the switch costs between allocentric and egocentric reference frames were found in both conditions, and the switch cost was higher for allocentric task. To our knowledge, this was the first study to focus on how switch costs and asymmetrical switch costs occur in allocentric and egocentric task switching.

The relationship between allocentric and egocentric frames of reference and categorical and coordinate spatial information processing

We report two experiments on the relationship between allocentric/egocentric frames of reference and categorical/coordinate spatial relations. Jager and Postma (2003) suggest two theoretical possibilities about their relationship: categorical judgements are better when combined with an allocentric reference frame and coordinate judgements with an egocentric reference frame (interaction hypothesis); allocentric/egocentric and categorical/coordinate form independent dimensions (independence hypothesis). Participants saw stimuli comprising two vertical bars (targets), one above and the other below a horizontal bar. They had to judge whether the targets appeared on the same side (categorical) or at the same distance (coordinate) with respect either to their body-midline (egocentric) or to the centre of the horizontal bar (allocentric). The results from Experiment 1 showed a facilitation in the allocentric and categorical conditions. In line with the independence hypothesis, no interaction effect emerged. To see whether the results were affected by the visual salience of the stimuli, in Experiment 2 the luminance of the horizontal bar was reduced. As a consequence, a significant interaction effect emerged indicating that categorical judgements were more accurate than coordinate ones, and especially so in the allocentric condition. Furthermore, egocentric judgements were as accurate as allocentric ones with a specific improvement when combined with coordinate spatial relations. The data from Experiment 2 showed that the visual salience of stimuli affected the relationship between allocentric/egocentric and categorical/coordinate dimensions. This suggests that the emergence of a selective interaction between the two dimensions may be modulated by the characteristics of the task.

Quantifying the interactions between allo- and egocentric representations of space

Under many circumstances, humans do not judge the location of objects in space where they really are. For instance, when a background is added to a target object, the judged position of a target with respect to oneself (egocentric position) is shifted in the opposite direction as the placement of such a background with respect to the body midline. It is an ongoing debate whether such effects are due to a uni- or bi-directional interaction between allo- and egocentric spatial representations in the brain, or reflect a response strategy, known as the perceived midline shift. In this study, the effects of allocentric stimulus coordinates on perceived egocentric position were examined more precisely and in a quantitative manner. Furthermore, it was investigated whether the judged allocentric position (with respect to a background) is also influenced by the egocentric position in space of that object. Allo- and egocentric coordinates were varied independently. Also, the effect of background luminance on the observed interactions between spatial coordinates was determined. Since background luminance had an effect on the size of the interaction between allocentric stimulus coordinates and egocentric judgments, and no reverse interaction was found, it seems that interactions between ego- and allocentric reference frames is most likely only unidirectional, with the latter affecting the former. This interaction effect was described in a quantitative manner.

Delay improves performance on a haptic spatial matching task

Systematic deviations occur when blindfolded subjects set a test bar parallel to a reference bar in the horizontal plane using haptic information (Kappers and Koenderink 1999, Perception 28:781-795; Kappers 1999, Perception 28:1001-1012). These deviations are assumed to reflect the use of a combination of a biasing egocentric reference frame and an allocentric, more cognitive one (Kappers 2002, Acta Psychol 109:25-40). In two experiments, we have examined the effect of delay between the perception of a reference bar and the parallel setting of a test bar. In both experiments a 10-s delay improved performance. The improvement increased with a larger horizontal (left-right) distance between the bars. This improvement was interpreted as a shift from the egocentric towards the allocentric reference frame during the delay period.

The cyclopean eye in vision: the new and old data continue to hit you right between the eyes

We argue against recent claims by Erkelens and van Ee (Vision Res., in press) and by Erkelens (Vision Res. 40 (2000) 2411) that "the concept of the cyclopean eye is em leader always irrelevant as far as vision is concerned" (p. 1157) [corrected] and that "perceived direction during monocular viewing is based on the signals of the viewing eye only" (p. 2411), respectively. In Experiment 1, we presented a pair of small lights on a visual axis and measured the absolute visual direction of the near light with reference to different parts of the face. The near light appeared in front of the bridge of the nose or very near it, contrary to what was expected from Erkelens and van Ee's claim that monocular stimuli are seen in their correct locations. In Experiment 2, we replicated Erkelens' experiments with measurements of phoria and analyses of eye movements. The results confirmed his finding that the cyclopean illusion occurred rarely in the monocular condition, but our phoria and eye movement data provided the basis for a very different interpretation. Our data show that the oculomotor signal in his particular monocular condition was considerably weaker than in his binocular condition; therefore, the rarity of the monocular cyclopean illusion is not surprising. Moreover, since both claims above are based on an over-generalization of the results of Erkelens' study, neither claim is persuasive.