How do people steer a car to intercept a moving target: Interceptions in different environments point to one strategy.

Which strategy people use to guide locomotor interception remains unclear despite considerable research and the importance of an answer with ramification into the heuristics and biases debate. Because the constant bearing (CB) strategy corresponds to the target-heading (CTH) strategy with an additional constraint, these two strategies can be confounded experimentally. But, the two strategies are distinct in the information they require: while the CTH strategy only requires access to the relative angle between the direction of motion and the target, the CB strategy requires access to a stable allocentric reference frame. Here, we manipulated the visual information about allocentric reference frames in three virtual environments and asked participants to steer a car to intercept a moving target. Participants' interception paths showed different degrees of curvature and their target-heading angles were approximately constant, consistent with the CTH strategy. By contrast, the target's bearing angle continuously changed in all participants except one. This particular participant produced linear interception paths with little change in the target's bearing angle, seemingly consistent with both strategies. This participant continued this pattern of steering even in the environment without any visual information about allocentric reference frames. Therefore, this pattern of steering is attributed to the CTH strategy rather than the CB strategy. The overall results add important evidence for the conclusion that locomotor interception is better accounted for by the CTH strategy and that experimentally observing a straight interception trajectory with a CB angle is not sufficient evidence for the CB strategy.