Abstract

Two studies invesligated updaling q[' se!f-position and heading dwinx real. imagined, wld simuh#ed locomotion. Snl/ects wel'e e.-los('d to (1 IWO-S(',k qHellt pttl]l with a titI'll between segnlentx.' they ,.ponded by tin'rang to,bee the ori,,in as they would if they had walked the path }nd were at the end ' the second stsment. The conalllions q['pathwG eA7oaw'e int htded physical walking. intaxined ,valking j)'om a verbal description. watchbtg another person wall and eperiencing optic flow that simulated walkinx. with or without a phys- ical turn between the path segments. tf .sldgects fitlied to npdaw an internal representation g' heading, but did encode tile pathway tl'ajeo tory. they xhottkl httve overturlcd hv the magnitltde 'the turn between the patJ segments. 5nch svslemalic overturnbig was ./bund in the description and watching comlitions, but not with physical walking. Simulated optic flow was not by itse'sttt'ient to induce spatial ttpdat- ing j/tat supported correct turn t'espon.cs+ An important component of navigation is updating knowledge of one's spatial position and orientation. People navigating on foot receive multiple cues for updating, Vision signals sclf-nolion by the changing positions of distal landmarks and by the optic flow teld. Proprioception (including veslibt, lar sensing as well as kines- hetic feedback from muscles. tendons. and joints) provides cues to the navigator's velocity and acceleration. In 1he research reported here, we asked how well people update heir inlernal representation of location and orientation as they rave[ in space under conditions in which these cues are reduced or unavailable, including conditions in which they do not physically move at all. The conditions examined included wafking without vision (proprioceplive cues...

Citations