Institute of the Physiology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Videnska 1083, Prague 4, 14200, Czech Republic.
Behav Brain Res. 2013 Mar 1;240:182-91. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2012.11.008. Epub 2012 Nov 19.
We studied the ability of monkeys and humans to orient in one spatial frame ("response frame") according to abstract spatial stimuli presented in another spatial frame ("stimulus frame"). The stimuli were designed as simple maps of the "response space". We studied how the transformations of these stimuli affected the performance. The subjects were trained to choose a particular position in the response frame - either on a touch screen (monkeys) or on a keyboard (humans) - according to schematic spatial stimuli presented on the stimulus screen. The monkeys responded by touching one of four circles shown in corners of a rectangle displayed on the touch screen. The correct position was signaled by the stimulus ("map") presented on the stimulus screen. The map was a complementary rectangle, but only with one circle shown ("pointer"). The position of this circle indicated the correct position in the response frame. In the first experiment we only manipulated stimuli presented on the computer screen. The "map" was originally shown in the same position and orientation as the "response pattern" but later the position and the rotation of the map on the screen were changing. Such transformations of the stimuli allow us to study the mental operations that the animals performed and how particular mental transformations mutually differed. In the second experiment we tested whether the monkeys relied more on stimuli presented on the screen or on the surrounding stable environment and objects. We compared the performance of animals in tasks with rotated virtual maps in a stable surrounding environment with the performance in tasks where we rotated the surrounding frame (computer monitor), whereas the stimuli on the screen remained stable. In the third experiment we tested human subjects in analogous tests to compare the ability and cognitive strategies of monkeys and humans in this task. We showed that the mental strategies that monkeys used for orientation in one spatial frame according to the map presented in the other spatial frame depended on the type of stimulus manipulation. We demonstrated that for monkeys there was a difference between solving "mental rotation" and "mental translocation" in this experimental design. We showed that humans were able both to mentally rotate and translocate the displayed stimuli. However, the mental rotation was more difficult than mental translocation also for them. These experiments help us to understand how the monkeys perceive the abstract spatial information, create the representation of space and how they transform the information about the position obtained from one spatial frame into another. The comparison between humans and monkeys allows us to study this cognitive ability in phylogeny.
我们研究了猴子和人类根据呈现于另一个空间框架（“刺激框架”）中的抽象空间刺激，在一个空间框架（“反应框架”）中定向的能力。这些刺激被设计成“反应空间”的简单地图。我们研究了这些刺激的变换如何影响表现。在实验中，实验对象被训练根据呈现于刺激屏幕上的示意性空间刺激，在反应框架中选择特定位置——猴子在触摸屏上，人类在键盘上。猴子通过触摸显示在触摸屏上的长方形四个角上的四个圆圈之一来做出反应。刺激（“地图”）会在刺激屏幕上显示，指示正确的位置。地图是一个互补的长方形，但只显示一个圆圈（“指针”）。这个圆圈的位置指示了反应框架中的正确位置。在第一个实验中，我们只操纵了计算机屏幕上呈现的刺激。“地图”最初与“反应模式”显示在相同的位置和方向，但后来地图在屏幕上的位置和旋转发生了变化。这种刺激的变换使我们能够研究动物进行的心理操作以及特定的心理变换如何相互不同。在第二个实验中，我们测试了猴子是否更依赖于屏幕上呈现的刺激，还是依赖于周围稳定的环境和物体。我们比较了动物在稳定环境中执行具有旋转虚拟地图的任务的表现，以及在我们旋转周围框架（计算机显示器）而屏幕上的刺激保持稳定的任务中的表现。在第三个实验中，我们对人类受试者进行了类似的测试，以比较猴子和人类在这项任务中的能力和认知策略。我们表明，猴子根据在另一个空间框架中呈现的地图在一个空间框架中定向时使用的心理策略取决于刺激操作的类型。我们证明，对于猴子来说，在这种实验设计中，解决“心理旋转”和“心理移位”之间存在差异。我们表明，人类既能够心理旋转又能够心理平移显示的刺激。然而，对于他们来说，心理旋转比心理平移更难。这些实验帮助我们了解猴子如何感知抽象的空间信息，创建空间的表示，以及如何将从一个空间框架中获得的位置信息转换到另一个空间框架中。人类和猴子之间的比较使我们能够在系统发生学中研究这种认知能力。
