Abstract
Although the literatures on human spatial cognition and animal navigation often make distinctions between egocentric and allocentric (also called exocentric or geocentric) representations, the terms have not generally been well defined. This chapter begins by making formal distinctions between three kinds of representations: allocentric locational, egocentric locational, and allocentric heading representations. These distinctions are made in the context of whole-body navigation (as contrasted, e.g., with manipulation). They are made on the basis of primitive parameters specified by each representation, and the representational distinctions are further supported by work on brain mechanisms used for animal navigation. From the assumptions about primitives, further inferences are made as to the kind of information each representation potentially makes available. Empirical studies of how well people compute primitive and derived spatial parameters are briefly reviewed. Finally, the chapter addresses what representations humans may use for processing spatial information during physical and imagined movement, and work on imagined updating of spatial position is used to constrain the connectivity among representations.
Chapter prepared for conference on Raumkognition, Trier, Germany, September 1997. The author acknowledges support of Grant 9740 from the National Eye Institute for the study of Klatzky et al. (in press). This work has benefited from extensive discussions of spatial cognition with Jack Loomis.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen, G. L. (1981). A developmental perspective on the effects of “subdividing” macrospatial experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 7, 120–132.
Amorim, M., Glasauer, S., Corpinot, K., & Berthoz, A. (1997). Updating an object’s orientation and location during nonvisual navigation: A comparison between two processing modes. Perception & Psychophysics, 59(3), 404–418.
Berthoz, A. (1991). Reference frames for the perception and control of movement. In J. Paillard (Ed.), Brain and space (pp. 81–111). New York: Oxford University Press.
Brewer, B., & Pears, J. (1993). Frames of reference. In R. Eilan, R. McCarthy, & B. Brewer (Eds.), Spatial representation: Problems in philosophy and psychology (pp. 25–30). Oxford: Blackwell.
Easton, R. D., & Sholl, M. J. (1995). Object-array structure, frames of reference, and retrieval of spatial knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 483–500.
Etienne, A. S., Maurer, R., & Séguinot, V. (1996). Path integration in mammals and its interaction with visual landmarks. Journal of Experimental Biology, 199, 201–209.
Gallistel, C. R. (1990). The organization of learning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Klatzky, R. L., Loomis, J. M., Beall, A. C., Chance, S. S., & Golledge, R. G. Updating an egocentric spatial representation during real, imagined, and virtual locomotion. Psychological Science, in press.
Klatzky, R. L., Loomis, J. M., & Golledge, R. G. (1997). Encoding spatial representations through nonvisually guided locomotion: Tests of human path integration. In D. Medin (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 37, pp. 41–84). San Diego: Academic Press.
Klatzky, R. L., Loomis, J. M., Golledge, R. G., Cicinelli, J. G., Doherty, S., & Pellegrino, J. W. (1990). Acquisition of route and survey knowledge in the absence of vision. Journal of Motor Behavior, 22, 19–43.
Kosslyn, S. M., Pick, H. L., & Fariello, G. R. (1974). Cognitive maps in children and men. Child Development, 45, 707–716.
Lederman, S. J., Klatzky, R. L., & Barber, P. (1985). Spatial-and movement-based heuristics for encoding pattern information through touch. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 33–49.
Lederman, S. J., & Taylor, M. M. (1969). Perception of interpolated position and orientation by vision and active touch. Perception & Psychophysics, 6, 153–159.
Levinson, S. C. (1996). Frames of reference and Molyneux’s question: Crosslinguistic evidence. In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. F. Garrett (Eds.), Language and space: Language, speech, and communication (pp. 109–169). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Loomis, J. M., Da Silva, J. A., Fujita, N., & Fukusima, S. S. (1992). Visual space perception and visually directed action. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 906–922.
Loomis, J. M., Klatzky, R. L., & Golledge, R. G. (in press). Human navigation by path integration. In R. Golledge (Ed.), Wayfinding: Cognitive mapping and spatial behavior. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University.
Loomis, J. M., Klatzky, R. L., Golledge, R. G., Cicinelli, J. G., Pellegrino, J. W., & Fry, P. (1993). Nonvisual navigation by blind and sighted: Assessment of path integration ability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 73–91.
Loomis, J. M., Klatzky, R. L., Philbeck, J. W., & Golledge, R. G. (in press). Assessing auditory distance perception using perceptually directed action. Perception & Psychophysics.
Maki, R. H. (1981). Categorization and distance effects with spatial linear orders. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 7, 15–32.
Maurer, R., & Séguinot, V. (1995). What is modeling for? A critical review of the models of path integration. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 175, 457–475.
May, M. (1996). Cognitive and embodied modes of spatial imagery. Psychologische Beitraege, 38, 418–434.
McNaughton, B. L., Leonard, B., & Chen, L. (1989). Cortical-hippocampal interactions and cognitive mapping: A hypothesis based on reintegration of the parietal and inferotemporal pathways for visual processing. Psychobiology, 17(3), 230–235.
O’Keefe, J. (1976). Place units in the hippocampus of the freely moving rat. Experimental Neurology, 51, 78–109.
O’Keefe, J., & Dostrovsky, J. (1971). The hippocampus as a spatial map: Preliminary evidence from unit activity in the freely moving rat. Experimental Brain Research, 34, (171–175).
O’Keefe, J., & Nadel, L. (1978). The hippocampus as a cognitive map. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Paillard, J. (1971). The motor determinants of spatial organization. Cahiers de Psychologie, 14, 261–316.
Philbeck, J. W., Loomis, J. M., & Beall, A. C. (1997). Visually perceived location is an invariant in the control of action. Perception & Psychophysics, 59(4), 601–612.
Pick, H. L. (1988). Perceptual aspects of spatial cognitive development. In J. Stiles-Davis, M. Kritchevsky, & U. Bellugi (Eds.), Spatial cognition: Brain bases and development (pp. 145–156). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Presson, C.C., & Montello, D.R. (1994). Updating after rotational and translation body movements: Coordinate structure of perspective space. Perception, 23, 1447–1455.
Redish, A. D. (1997). Beyond the cognitive map: A computational neuroscience theory of navigation in the rodent. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
Redish, A. D., & Touretzky, D. S. (1997). Cognitive maps beyond the hippocampus. Hippocampus, 7, 15–35.
Rieser, J. J. (1989). Access to knowledge of spatial structure at novel points of observation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15(6), 1157–1165.
Soechting, J. F., Tong, D. C., & Flanders, M. (1996). Frames of reference in sensorimotor integration: Position sense of the arm and hand. In A. M. Wing, P. Haggard, & J. R. Flanagan (Eds.), Hand and brain: The neurophysiology and psychology of hand movements (pp. 151–167). San Diego, CA: Academic Press, Inc.
Stevens, A., & Coupe, P. (1978). Distortions in judged spatial relations. Cognitive Psychology, 10, 422–437.
Thorndyke, P. W. (1981). Distance estimation from cognitive maps. Cognitive Psychology, 13, 526–550.
Touretzky, D. S., & Redish, A. D. (1996). Theory of rodent navigation based on interacting representations of space. Hippocampus, 6, 247–270.
Tversky, B. (1981). Distortions in memory for maps. Cognitive Psychology, 13, 407–433.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1998 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Klatzky, R.L. (1998). Allocentric and Egocentric Spatial Representations: Definitions, Distinctions, and Interconnections. In: Freksa, C., Habel, C., Wender, K.F. (eds) Spatial Cognition. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 1404. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-69342-4_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-69342-4_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-64603-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69342-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive