scholarly journals Postural Adaptation of the Spatial Reference Frames to Microgravity: Back to the Egocentric Reference Frame

PLoS ONE ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. e10259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sébastien Viel ◽  
Marianne Vaugoyeau ◽  
Christine Assaiante
Keyword(s):  
Reference Frame ◽  
Reference Frames ◽  
Egocentric Reference Frame ◽  
Spatial Reference ◽  
Spatial Reference Frames

scholarly journals Reference frames in spatial communication for navigation and sports: an empirical study in ultimate frisbee players

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven M. Weisberg ◽  
Anjan Chatterjee
Keyword(s):  
Reference Frame ◽  
Reference Frames ◽  
Spatial Information ◽  
Spatial Reference ◽  
Spatial Reference Frames ◽  
The North ◽  
Communication Task ◽  
Spatial Communication ◽  
Spatial Domains ◽  
Ultimate Frisbee

Abstract Background Reference frames ground spatial communication by mapping ambiguous language (for example, navigation: “to the left”) to properties of the speaker (using a Relative reference frame: “to my left”) or the world (Absolute reference frame: “to the north”). People’s preferences for reference frame vary depending on factors like their culture, the specific task in which they are engaged, and differences among individuals. Although most people are proficient with both reference frames, it is unknown whether preference for reference frames is stable within people or varies based on the specific spatial domain. These alternatives are difficult to adjudicate because navigation is one of few spatial domains that can be naturally solved using multiple reference frames. That is, while spatial navigation directions can be specified using Absolute or Relative reference frames (“go north” vs “go left”), other spatial domains predominantly use Relative reference frames. Here, we used two domains to test the stability of reference frame preference: one based on navigating a four-way intersection; and the other based on the sport of ultimate frisbee. We recruited 58 ultimate frisbee players to complete an online experiment. We measured reaction time and accuracy while participants solved spatial problems in each domain using verbal prompts containing either Relative or Absolute reference frames. Details of the task in both domains were kept as similar as possible while remaining ecologically plausible so that reference frame preference could emerge. Results We pre-registered a prediction that participants would be faster using their preferred reference frame type and that this advantage would correlate across domains; we did not find such a correlation. Instead, the data reveal that people use distinct reference frames in each domain. Conclusion This experiment reveals that spatial reference frame types are not stable and may be differentially suited to specific domains. This finding has broad implications for communicating spatial information by offering an important consideration for how spatial reference frames are used in communication: task constraints may affect reference frame choice as much as individual factors or culture.

scholarly journals Exploring Reference Frame Integration Using Response Demands in a Tactile Temporal-Order Judgement Task

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-32
Author(s):  
Kaian Unwalla ◽  
Daniel Goldreich ◽  
David I. Shore
Keyword(s):  
Reference Frame ◽  
Reference Frames ◽  
Temporal Order ◽  
Relative Weight ◽  
Internal Reference ◽  
Spatial Reference ◽  
Spatial Reference Frames ◽  
External Reference ◽  
Temporal Order Judgement ◽  
Bias Condition

Abstract Exploring the world through touch requires the integration of internal (e.g., anatomical) and external (e.g., spatial) reference frames — you only know what you touch when you know where your hands are in space. The deficit observed in tactile temporal-order judgements when the hands are crossed over the midline provides one tool to explore this integration. We used foot pedals and required participants to focus on either the hand that was stimulated first (an anatomical bias condition) or the location of the hand that was stimulated first (a spatiotopic bias condition). Spatiotopic-based responses produce a larger crossed-hands deficit, presumably by focusing observers on the external reference frame. In contrast, anatomical-based responses focus the observer on the internal reference frame and produce a smaller deficit. This manipulation thus provides evidence that observers can change the relative weight given to each reference frame. We quantify this effect using a probabilistic model that produces a population estimate of the relative weight given to each reference frame. We show that a spatiotopic bias can result in either a larger external weight (Experiment 1) or a smaller internal weight (Experiment 2) and provide an explanation of when each one would occur.

Spatial frames for motor control would be commensurate with spatial frames for vision and proprioception, but what about control of energy flows?

1995 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 773-773 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher C. Pagano ◽  
Geoffrey P. Bingham
Keyword(s):  
Motor Control ◽  
Energy Expenditure ◽  
Reference Frame ◽  
Reference Frames ◽  
Coordinate Frame ◽  
Spatial Coordinate ◽  
Spatial Reference ◽  
Spatial Reference Frames ◽  
Energy Flows ◽  
Spatial Tasks

AbstractThe model identifies a spatial coordinate frame within which the sensorimotor apparatus produces movement. Its spatial nature simplifies its coupling with spatial reference frames used concurrently by vision and proprioception. While the positional reference frame addresses the performance of spatial tasks, it seems to have little to say about movements involving energy expenditure as the principle component of the task.

scholarly journals Reference frames in spatial communication for navigation and sports: An empirical study in ultimate frisbee players

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Marc Weisberg ◽  
Anjan Chatterjee
Keyword(s):  
Reference Frame ◽  
Reference Frames ◽  
Spatial Information ◽  
Spatial Reference ◽  
Spatial Reference Frames ◽  
The North ◽  
Communication Task ◽  
Spatial Communication ◽  
Spatial Domains ◽  
Ultimate Frisbee

Background: Reference frames ground spatial communication by mapping ambiguous language (for example, navigation: “to the left”) to properties of the speaker (using a body-based reference frame: “to my left”) or the world (environment-based reference frame: “to the north”). People’s preferences for reference frame vary depending on factors like their culture, the specific task in which they are engaged, and differences among individuals. Although most people are proficient with both reference frames, it is unknown whether preference for reference frames is stable within people or varies based on the specific spatial domain. These alternatives are difficult to adjudicate because navigation is one of few spatial domains that can be naturally solved using multiple reference frames. That is, while spatial navigation directions can be specified using environment-based or body-based reference frames (“go north” vs. “go left”), other spatial domains predominantly use body-based reference frames. Here, we used two domains to test the stability of reference frame preference – one based on navigating a four-way intersection, the other based on the sport of ultimate frisbee. We recruited 58 ultimate frisbee players to complete an online experiment. We measured reaction time and accuracy while participants solved spatial problems in each domain using verbal prompts containing either body- or environment-based reference frames. Details of the task in both domains were kept as similar as possible while remaining ecologically plausible so that reference frame preference could emerge. Results: We pre-registered a prediction that participants would be faster using their preferred reference frame type, and that this advantage would correlate across domains; we did not find such a correlation. Instead, the data reveal that people use distinct reference frames in each domain. Conclusion: This experiment reveals that spatial reference frame types are not stable and may be differentially suited to specific domains. This finding has broad implications for communicating spatial information by offering an important consideration for how spatial reference frames are used in communication: task constraints may affect reference frame choice as much as individual factors or culture.

scholarly journals Brain Dynamics of Spatial Reference Frame Proclivity in Active Navigation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Che-Sheng Yang ◽  
Jia Liu ◽  
Avinash Singh ◽  
Kuan-Chih Huang ◽  
Chin-Teng Lin
Keyword(s):  
Reference Frame ◽  
Parietal Cortex ◽  
Reference Frames ◽  
Occipital Cortex ◽  
Brain Dynamics ◽  
Alpha Band ◽  
Turning Angle ◽  
Spatial Reference ◽  
Spatial Reference Frames ◽  
Spatial Reference Frame

Recent research into navigation strategy of different spatial reference frame proclivities (RFPs) has revealed that the parietal cortex plays an important role in processing allocentric information to provide a translation function between egocentric and allocentric spatial reference frames. However, most studies merely focused on a passive experimental environment, which is not truly representative of our daily spatial learning/navigation tasks. This study investigated the factor associated with brain dynamics that causes people to switch their preferred spatial strategy in different environments in virtual reality (VR) based active navigation task to bridge the gap. High-resolution electroencephalography (EEG) signals were recorded to monitor spectral perturbations on transitions between egocentric and allocentric frames during a path integration task. Our brain dynamics results showed navigation involved areas including the parietal cortex with modulation in the alpha band, the occipital cortex with beta and low gamma band perturbations, and the frontal cortex with theta perturbation. Differences were found between two different turning-angle paths in the alpha band in parietal cluster event-related spectral perturbations (ERSPs). In small turning-angle paths, allocentric participants showed stronger alpha desynchronization than egocentric participants; in large turning-angle paths, participants for two reference frames had a smaller difference in the alpha frequency band. Behavior results of homing errors also corresponded to brain dynamic results, indicating that a larger angle path caused the allocentric to have a higher tendency to become egocentric navigators in the active navigation environment.

scholarly journals Testing the spatial reference frames used for manual interception

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 1063-1063
Author(s):  
J. C. Dessing ◽  
J. D. Crawford ◽  
W. P. Medendorp
Keyword(s):  
Reference Frames ◽  
Spatial Reference ◽  
Spatial Reference Frames
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document