Sensory SystemsSensory SystemsСенсорные системы0235-00923034-5936The Russian Academy of Sciences67581110.31857/S0235009223020026QSWNUUЗРИТЕЛЬНАЯ СИСТЕМАAnalysis of the gaze fixations in performance of mental recall of the route on a city map. Effects of landmark type and genderАнализ движений глаз при выполнении задачи мысленного воспроизведения маршрута на карте городской местности. Влияние типа меток и полаKushnirA. B.КушнирА. Б.naya.kushnir@gmail.comMikhailovaE. S.МихайловаЕ. С.naya.kushnir@gmail.comGerasimenkoN. Yu.ГерасименкоН. Ю.naya.kushnir@gmail.comKazarezovaI. A.КазарезоваИ. А.naya.kushnir@gmail.comInstitute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology of RASФГБУН Институт высшей нервной деятельности и нейрофизиологии РАН0104202337213815128022025Copyright ©; 2023, Russian Academy of SciencesCopyright ©; 2023, Российская академия наук2023Russian Academy of SciencesРоссийская академия наукhttps://journals.eco-vector.com/0235-0092/article/view/675811

A psychophysiological eye-tracking experiment was conducted to investigate map navigation (including tasks of familiarization with the map, route memorization and recall of the route) as a function of landmark type (no landmarks, object landmarks, verbal landmarks, both types of landmarks) and gender. It was found that the number of fixations decreased and the fixation duration increased during recall compared to map familiarization and route memorization. The effect of task type on eye movements varied between route proximity areas. In the proximal areas, the number of fixations decreased during recall in comparison to memorization, while in the distal (“off route”) area the effect was opposite. These changes were pronounced in the male participants and did not reach statistical significance in the females. Men switched more frequently from the proximal to the distal area during memorization, thus forming a connection between the route and the remote environment. In contrast, women’s gaze was more often directed to the distal area during route recall. The map with object landmarks differed from the other maps in the lower number and longer fixation duration, indicating the advantage of object landmarks and, possibly, a preference for the object visual cognitive style among our participants.

В психофизиологическом эксперименте с регистрацией движений глаз исследовали особенности навигации по карте (ознакомление с картой, запоминание и воспроизведение маршрута) в зависимости от типа меток на местности (отсутствие меток, с объектными метками, с вербальными метками, с двумя типами меток) и пола. Показаны снижение количества фиксаций и нарастание их длительности при воспроизведении маршрута по сравнению с ознакомлением и запоминанием. Зависимость глазодвигательных реакций от выполняемой задачи неодинакова в зонах карты, отличающихся степенью близости к маршруту. В более близких к маршруту зонах количество фиксаций при воспроизведении снижается по сравнению с запоминанием. Напротив, в отдаленной от него “зоне вне маршрута” количество фиксаций при воспроизведении увеличивается. Эти изменения отчетливы у мужчин и не достигают уровня значимости у женщин. Мужчины при запоминании совершают больше переходов из ближней зоны в “зону вне маршрута”, тем самым формируя связь маршрута с отдаленным пространством. Женщины, напротив, чаще посещают отдаленные от маршрута участки пространства при воспроизведении. Карта с объектными метками отличается от других типов карт меньшим количеством фиксаций и большей их длительностью, что указывает на преимущество объектных меток и, как предположение, на использование испытуемыми при выполнении задания объектного визуального когнитивного стиля.

humangendervisionspatial navigationeye movementчеловекползрениенавигациядвижения глазKushnir A.B., Gerasimenko N.Yu., Mikhailova E.S. Polovye razlichiya vypolneniya zadachi myslennogo vosproizvedeniya marshruta na karte gorodskoi mestnosti. Analiz dvizhenii glaz [Gender differences in perfomance of mental recall of the route on a city map. Analysis of the eye movements character]. Sensornye sistemy [Sensory systems]. 2019. V. 33 (4). P. 333–344 (in Russian). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0235009219040048Кушнир А.Б., Герасименко Н.Ю., Михайлова Е.С. Половые различия выполнения задачи мысленного воспроизведения маршрута на карте городской местности. Анализ движений глаз. Сенсорные системы. 2019. Т. 33. № 4. С. 333–344. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0235009219040048Blajenkova O., Kozhevnikov M., Motes M.A. Object–spatial imagery: A new self–report imagery questionnaire. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 2006. V. 20. P. 239–263. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1182Blazhenkova O., Kozhevnikov M. The new object–spatial–verbal cognitive style model: Theory and measurement. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 2009. V. 23 (5). P. 638–663. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1473Blazhenkova O., Kozhevnikov M. The new object–spatial–verbal cognitive style model: Theory and measurement. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 2009. V. 23. № 5. P. 638–663. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1473Bocchi A., Palermo L., Boccia M., Palmiero M., D’Amico S., Piccardi L. Object recognition and location: Which component of object location memory for landmarks is affected by gender? Evidence from four to ten year–old children. Appl. Neuropsychol. Child. 2018. V. 9. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622965.2018.1504218Bocchi A., Palermo L., Boccia M., Palmiero M., D’Amico S., Piccardi L. Object recognition and location: Which component of object location memory for landmarks is affected by gender? Evidence from four to ten year–old children. Appl. Neuropsychol. Child. 2018. V. 9. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622965.2018.1504218Boccia M., Vecchione F., Piccardi L., Guariglia C. Effect of сognitive style on learning and retrieval of navigational environments. Front. Pharmacol. 2017. V. 8. P. 496. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2017.00496Boccia M., Vecchione F., Piccardi L., Guariglia C. Effect of cognitive style on learning and retrieval of navigational environments. Front. Pharmacol. 2017. V. 8. P. 496. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2017.00496Brouwer A.M., Hogervorst M.A., Oudejans B., Ries A.J., Touryan J. EEG and eye tracking signatures of target encoding during structured visual search. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2017. V. 11. P. 264. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00264Brügger A., Richter K.F., Fabrikant S.I. How does navigation system behavior influence human behavior? Cogn. Res. Princ. Implic. 2019. V. 4 (1). P. 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-019-0156-5Brügger A., Richter K.F., Fabrikant S.I. How does navigation system behavior influence human behavior? Cogn. Res. Princ. Implic. 2019. V. 4. № 1. P. 5.Cheng C.Y., Yen M.Y., Lin H.Y., Hsia W.W., Hsu W.M. Association of ocular dominance and anisometropic myopia. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2004. V. 45 (8). P. 2856–2860. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.03-0878Cheng C.Y., Yen M.Y., Lin H.Y., Hsia W.W., Hsu W.M. Association of ocular dominance and anisometropic myopia. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2004. V. 45. № 8. P. 2856–2860.Gagnon K.T., Thomas B.J., Munion A., Creem-Regehr S.H., Cashdan E.A., Stefanucci J.K. Not all those who wander are lost: Spatial exploration patterns and their relationship to gender and spatial memory. Cognition. 2018. V. 180. P. 108–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.06.020Grön G., Wunderlich A.P., Spitzer M., Tomczak R., Riepe M.W. Brain activation during human navigation: gender–different neural networks as substrate of performance. Nat. Neurosci. 2000. V. 3 (4). P. 404–408. https://doi.org/10.1038/73980Grön G., Wunderlich A.P., Spitzer M., Tomczak R., Riepe M.W. Brain activation during human navigation: gender–different neural networks as substrate of performance. Nat. Neurosci. 2000. V. 3. № 4. P. 404–408. https://doi.org/10.1038/73980Harris T., Scheuringer A., Pletzer B. Perspective and strategy interactively modulate sex differences in a 3D navigation task. Biol. Sex Differ. 2019. V. 10 (1). P. 17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13293-019-0232-zHarris T., Scheuringer A., Pletzer B. Perspective and strategy interactively modulate sex differences in a 3D navigation task. Biol. Sex Differ. 2019. V. 10. № 1. P. 17.Höffler T.N., Koć-Januchta M., Leutner D. More evidence for three types of cognitive style: Validating the Object–Spatial Imagery and Verbal Questionnaire using eye tracking when learning with texts and pictures. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 2017. V. 31. P. 109–115. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3300Irving S., Schöberl F., Pradhan C., Brendel M., Bartenstein P., Dieterich M., Brandt T., Zwergal A. A novel real–space navigation paradigm reveals age- and gender–dependent changes of navigational strategies and hippocampal activation. J. Neurol. 2018. V. 265 (1). P. 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-018-8987-4Irving S., Schöberl F., Pradhan C., Brendel M., Bartenstein P., Dieterich M., Brandt T., Zwergal A. A novel real–space navigation paradigm reveals age– and gender–dependent changes of navigational strategies and hippocampal activation. J. Neurol. 2018. V. 265. № 1. P. 113–126.Klippel A., Hirtle S., Davies C. You–Are–Here Maps: Creating spatial awareness through maplike representations. Spat. Cogn. Comput. 2010. V. 10. P. 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/13875861003770625Klippel A., Richter K.F., Barkowsky T., Freksa C. The cognitive reality of schematic maps. Map–based mobile services. Eds. Meng L., Reichenbacher T., Zipf A. Berlin, Heidelberg. Springer, 2005. P. 55–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-26982-7_5Klippel A., Richter K.F., Barkowsky T., Freksa C. The cognitive reality of schematic maps. Map–based mobile services. Eds. Meng L., Reichenbacher T., Zipf A. Berlin, Heidelberg. Springer, 2005. P. 55–71.Kong X.Z., Huang Y., Hao X., Hu S., Liu J. Sex–linked association between cortical scene selectivity and navigational ability. Neuroimage. 2017. V. 158. P. 397–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.07.031Kozhevnikov M. Cognitive styles in the context of modern psychology: toward an integrated framework of cognitive style. Psychol. Bull. 2007. V. 133 (3). P. 464–481. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.3.464Kozhevnikov M. Cognitive styles in the context of modern psychology: toward an integrated framework of cognitive style. Psychol. Bull. 2007. V. 133. № 3. P. 464–481.Kraemer D.J.M., Schinazi V.R., Cawkwell P.B., Tekriwal A., Epstein R.A., Thompson–Schill S.L. Verbalizing, visualizing, and navigating: The effect of strategies on encoding a large–scale virtual environment. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 2017. V. 43 (4). P. 611–621. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000314Kraemer D.J.M., Schinazi V.R., Cawkwell P.B., Tekriwal A., Epstein R.A., Thompson–Schill S.L. Verbalizing, visualizing, and navigating: The effect of strategies on encoding a large–scale virtual environment. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 2017. V. 43. № 4. P. 611–621. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000314Meister M.L.R., Buffalo E.A. Getting directions from the hippocampus: The neural connection between looking and memory. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 2016. V. 134. P. 135–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nlm.2015.12.004Merrill E.C., Yang Y., Roskos B., Steele S. Sex differences in using spatial and verbal abilities influence route learning performance in a virtual environment: A comparison of 6– to 12–year old boys and girls. Front. Psychol. 2016. V. 7. P. 258. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00258Mitolo M., Gardini S., Caffarra P., Ronconi L., Venneri A., Pazzaglia F. Relationship between spatial ability, visuospatial working memory and self–assessed spatial orientation ability: a study in older adults. Cogn. Process. 2015. V. 16 (2). P. 165–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-015-0647-3Mitolo M., Gardini S., Caffarra P., Ronconi L., Venneri A., Pazzaglia F. Relationship between spatial ability, visuospatial working memory and self–assessed spatial orientation ability: a study in older adults. Cogn. Process. 2015. V. 16. № 2. P. 165–176.Mueller S.C., Jackson C.P.T., Skelton R.W. Sex differences in a virtual water maze: An eye tracking and pupillometry study. Behav. Brain Res. 2008. V. 193(2). P. 209–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2008.05.017Mueller S.C., Jackson C. P.T., Skelton R.W. Sex differences in a virtual water maze: An eye tracking and pupillometry study. Behav. Brain Res. 2008. V. 193. № 2. P. 209–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2008.05.017Nazareth A., Huang X., Voyer D., Newcombe N. A meta–analysis of sex differences in human navigation skills. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 2019. V. 26 (5). P. 1503–1528. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01633-6Nazareth A., Huang X., Voyer D., Newcombe N. A meta–analysis of sex differences in human navigation skills. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 2019. V. 26. № 5. P. 1503–1528.Nori R., Giusberti F. Predicting cognitive styles from spatial abilities. Am. J. Psychol. 2006. V. 119. P. 67–86. https://doi.org/10.2307/20445319Nori R., Piccardi L., Maialetti A., Goro M., Rossetti A., Argento O., Guariglia C. No gender differences in egocentric and allocentric environmental transformation after compensating for male advantage by manipulating familiarity. Front. Neurosci. 2018. V. 12. P. 204. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00204Pazzaglia F., De Beni R. Strategies of processing spatial information in survey and landmark–centred individuals. Eur. J. Cogn. Psychol. 2001. V. 13. P. 493–508. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440042000124Pazzaglia F., Meneghetti C., Ronconi L. Tracing a route and finding a shortcut: The working memory, motivational, and personality factors involved. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2018. V. 12. P. 225. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2018.00225Pazzaglia F., Moè A. Cognitive styles and mental rotation ability in map learning. Cogn. Process. 2013. V. 14 (4). P. 391–399. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-013-0572-2Pazzaglia F., Moè A. Cognitive styles and mental rotation ability in map learning. Cogn. Process. 2013. V. 14. № 4. P. 391–399.Piccardi L., De Luca M., Nori R., Palermo L., Iachini F., Guariglia C. Navigational style influences eye movement pattern during exploration and learning of an environmental map. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 2016. V. 10. P. 140. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2016.00140Piccardi L., De Luca M., Nori R., Palermo L., Iachini F., Guariglia C. Navigational style influences eye movement pattern during exploration and learning of an environmental map. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 2016. V. 10. P. 140. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2016.00140Piccardi L., Palermo L., Bocchi A., Guariglia C., D’Amico S. Does spatial locative comprehension predict landmark–based navigation? PLoS One. 2015. V. 10(1). P. e0115432. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115432Piccardi L., Palermo L., Bocchi A., Guariglia C., D’Amico S. Does spatial locative comprehension predict landmark–based navigation? PLoS One. 2015. V. 10. № 1. P. e0115432. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115432Saucier D.M., Green S.M., Leason J., MacFadden A., Bell S., Elias L.J. Are sex differences in navigation caused by sexually dimorphic strategies or by differences in the ability to use the strategies? Behav. Neurosci. 2002. V. 116 (3). P. 403–410. https://doi.org/10.1037//0735-7044.116.3.403Saucier D.M., Green S.M., Leason J., MacFadden A., Bell S., Elias L.J. Are sex differences in navigation caused by sexually dimorphic strategies or by differences in the ability to use the strategies? Behav. Neurosci. 2002. V. 116. № 3. P. 403–410.Voyer D., Voyer S.D., Saint–Aubin J. Sex differences in visual–spatial working memory: A meta–analysis. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 2017. V. 24 (2). P. 307–334. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1085-7Voyer D., Voyer S.D., Saint–Aubin J. Sex differences in visual–spatial working memory: A meta–analysis. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 2017. V. 24. № 2. P. 307–334.Wolbers T., Wiener J.M. Challenges for identifying the neural mechanisms that support spatial navigation: the impact of spatial scale. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2014. V. 8. P. 571. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00571Yagi S., Galea L.A.M. Sex differences in hippocampal cognition and neurogenesis. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2019. V. 44 (1). P. 200–213. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-018-0208-4Yagi S., Galea L.A.M. Sex differences in hippocampal cognition and neurogenesis. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2019. V. 44. № 1. P. 200–213.