Wayfinding in pairs: comparing the planning and navigation performance of dyads and individuals in a real-world environment.

IF 3.4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications Pub Date : 2024-06-21 DOI:10.1186/s41235-024-00563-9
Crystal Bae, Daniel Montello, Mary Hegarty
{"title":"Wayfinding in pairs: comparing the planning and navigation performance of dyads and individuals in a real-world environment.","authors":"Crystal Bae, Daniel Montello, Mary Hegarty","doi":"10.1186/s41235-024-00563-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Navigation is essential to life, and it is cognitively complex, drawing on abilities such as prospective and situated planning, spatial memory, location recognition, and real-time decision-making. In many cases, day-to-day navigation is embedded in a social context where cognition and behavior are shaped by others, but the great majority of existing research in spatial cognition has focused on individuals. The two studies we report here contribute to our understanding of social wayfinding, assessing the performance of paired and individual navigators on a real-world wayfinding task in which they were instructed to minimize time and distance traveled. In the first study, we recruited 30 pairs of friends (familiar dyads); in the second, we recruited 30 solo participants (individuals). We compare the two studies to the results of an earlier study of 30 pairs of strangers (unfamiliar dyads). We draw out differences in performance with respect to spatial, social, and cognitive considerations. Of the three conditions, solo participants were least successful in reaching the destination accurately on their initial attempt. Friends traveled more efficiently than either strangers or individuals. Working with a partner also appeared to lend confidence to wayfinders: dyads of either familiarity type were more persistent than individuals in the navigation task, even after encountering challenges or making incorrect attempts. Route selection was additionally impacted by route complexity and unfamiliarity with the study area. Navigators explicitly used ease of remembering as a planning criterion, and the resulting differences in route complexity likely influenced success during enacted navigation.</p>","PeriodicalId":46827,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","volume":"9 1","pages":"40"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11189867/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-024-00563-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Navigation is essential to life, and it is cognitively complex, drawing on abilities such as prospective and situated planning, spatial memory, location recognition, and real-time decision-making. In many cases, day-to-day navigation is embedded in a social context where cognition and behavior are shaped by others, but the great majority of existing research in spatial cognition has focused on individuals. The two studies we report here contribute to our understanding of social wayfinding, assessing the performance of paired and individual navigators on a real-world wayfinding task in which they were instructed to minimize time and distance traveled. In the first study, we recruited 30 pairs of friends (familiar dyads); in the second, we recruited 30 solo participants (individuals). We compare the two studies to the results of an earlier study of 30 pairs of strangers (unfamiliar dyads). We draw out differences in performance with respect to spatial, social, and cognitive considerations. Of the three conditions, solo participants were least successful in reaching the destination accurately on their initial attempt. Friends traveled more efficiently than either strangers or individuals. Working with a partner also appeared to lend confidence to wayfinders: dyads of either familiarity type were more persistent than individuals in the navigation task, even after encountering challenges or making incorrect attempts. Route selection was additionally impacted by route complexity and unfamiliarity with the study area. Navigators explicitly used ease of remembering as a planning criterion, and the resulting differences in route complexity likely influenced success during enacted navigation.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
结伴寻路:比较双人和个人在真实世界环境中的规划和导航性能。
导航对生活至关重要,它在认知上非常复杂,需要利用前瞻性和情景规划、空间记忆、位置识别和实时决策等能力。在许多情况下,日常导航都是在社会环境中进行的,在这种环境中,认知和行为都受到他人的影响,但现有的绝大多数空间认知研究都集中在个人身上。我们在此报告的两项研究有助于加深我们对社会寻路的理解,这两项研究评估了配对和单独导航员在真实世界寻路任务中的表现,在这项任务中,他们被要求尽量减少所花费的时间和路程。在第一项研究中,我们招募了 30 对朋友(熟悉的二人组);在第二项研究中,我们招募了 30 名单独参与者(个人)。我们将这两项研究结果与之前对 30 对陌生人(不熟悉的二人组)的研究结果进行了比较。我们从空间、社交和认知等方面的考虑得出了表现的差异。在三种情况下,单人参与者在初次尝试时准确到达目的地的成功率最低。与陌生人或个人相比,朋友的旅行效率更高。与伙伴合作似乎也能给寻路者带来信心:在导航任务中,无论哪种熟悉类型的二人组都比个人组更能坚持,即使在遇到挑战或尝试错误之后也是如此。路线选择还受到路线复杂性和对研究区域不熟悉程度的影响。导航员明确地将易记性作为规划标准,由此产生的路线复杂性差异很可能会影响制定导航的成功率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
7.30%
发文量
96
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊最新文献
Fixation durations on familiar items are longer due to attenuation of exploration. Different facets of age perception in people with developmental prosopagnosia and "super-recognisers". Self-evaluations and the language of the beholder: objective performance and language solidarity predict L2 and L1 self-evaluations in bilingual adults. Correction: Distress reactions and susceptibility to misinformation for an analogue trauma event. Jack of all trades, master of one: domain-specific and domain-general contributions to perceptual expertise in visual comparison.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1