Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia,
Psychon Bull Rev. 2013 Dec;20(6):1033-54. doi: 10.3758/s13423-013-0416-1.
The purpose of this article is to review and evaluate the range of theories proposed to explain findings on the use of geometry in reorientation. We consider five key approaches and models associated with them and, in the course of reviewing each approach, five key issues. First, we take up modularity theory itself, as recently revised by Lee and Spelke (Cognitive Psychology, 61, 152-176, 2010a; Experimental Brain Research, 206, 179-188, 2010b). In this context, we discuss issues concerning the basic distinction between geometry and features. Second, we review the view-matching approach (Stürzl, Cheung, Cheng, & Zeil, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 34, 1-14, 2008). In this context, we highlight the possibility of cross-species differences, as well as commonalities. Third, we review an associative theory (Miller & Shettleworth, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 33, 191-212, 2007; Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 34, 419-422, 2008). In this context, we focus on phenomena of cue competition. Fourth, we take up adaptive combination theory (Newcombe & Huttenlocher, 2006). In this context, we focus on discussing development and the effects of experience. Fifth, we examine various neurally based approaches, including frameworks proposed by Doeller and Burgess (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105, 5909-5914, 2008; Doeller, King, & Burgess, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105, 5915-5920, 2008) and by Sheynikhovich, Chavarriaga, Strösslin, Arleo, and Gerstner (Psychological Review, 116, 540-566, 2009). In this context, we examine the issue of the neural substrates of spatial navigation. We conclude that none of these approaches can account for all of the known phenomena concerning the use of geometry in reorientation and clarify what the challenges are for each approach.
本文旨在回顾和评估用于解释在重新定向中使用几何原理方面发现的各种理论。我们考虑了五个与之相关的关键方法和模型，并在回顾每个方法的过程中探讨了五个关键问题。首先，我们探讨了模块化理论本身，最近 Lee 和 Spelke 在《认知心理学》（61, 152-176, 2010a;《实验脑研究》, 206, 179-188, 2010b）中对该理论进行了修订。在这种背景下，我们讨论了与几何原理和特征之间的基本区别相关的问题。其次，我们回顾了视窗匹配方法（Stürzl、Cheung、Cheng 和 Zeil, 《实验心理学杂志：动物行为过程》, 34, 1-14, 2008）。在这种背景下，我们强调了跨物种差异以及共性的可能性。第三，我们回顾了一种联想理论（Miller 和 Shettleworth, 《实验心理学杂志：动物行为过程》, 33, 191-212, 2007;《实验心理学杂志：动物行为过程》, 34, 419-422, 2008）。在这种背景下，我们重点讨论了线索竞争现象。第四，我们探讨了自适应组合理论（Newcombe 和 Huttenlocher, 2006）。在这种背景下，我们重点讨论了发展和经验的影响。第五，我们研究了各种基于神经的方法，包括 Doeller 和 Burgess 提出的框架（《美国国家科学院院刊》, 105, 5909-5914, 2008;Doeller、King 和 Burgess, 《美国国家科学院院刊》, 105, 5915-5920, 2008）和 Sheynikhovich、Chavarriaga、Strösslin、Arleo 和 Gerstner 提出的框架（《心理学评论》, 116, 540-566, 2009）。在这种背景下，我们研究了空间导航的神经基质问题。我们的结论是，这些方法都无法解释在重新定向中使用几何原理的所有已知现象，并阐明了每个方法所面临的挑战。
