Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T16:18:06.741Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of the Instructions on the Performance and Establishment of Memorization Strategies in Space Judgments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 April 2014

Alessandra Ackel Rodrigues  and
Susi Lippi Marques
Alessandra Ackel Rodrigues
Affiliation:
Universidade Federal de São Carlos, Sao Pãulo, Brazil.
Susi Lippi Marques*
Affiliation:
Universidade Federal de São Carlos, Sao Pãulo, Brazil.
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Marques, Susi Lippi, UFSCar, CECH-Departamento de Psicologia, Caixa Postal 676, Sao Carlos, SP, Brazil, 13565-905, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Studies of visual space perception have been assuming that people have an internal representation of the physical space that surrounds them. A variety of psychophysical procedures has been used in an attempt to measure the properties of visual space. The goal of the present study was to evaluate the accuracy of the mental representation and the strategies adopted to acquire and retain visuo-spatial information of a configuration as a function of two types of instructions. Thirty-eight undergraduate and graduate students participated in the study and were distributed in perceptive and mnemonic experimental conditions. The effect of the instructions (intentional and incidental) on the representation of the distances among the objects of the scene was estimated using exponents of power function, based on the reproduction of the distances among the stimuli of the scene. The results revealed that judgments made under intentional instructions were more frequently based on strategies related to the location of the stimuli, whereas judgments originating from incidental instructions were based on strategies related to the name of the stimuli. It was observed that the intentional instruction facilitated a more accurate mental representation of the observed experimental configuration, enhancing participants' performance.

Los estudios sobre la percepción visual del espacio asumen que las personas tienen una representación interna del espacio físico que les rodea. Con la finalidad de medir las propiedades de tal percepción visual se han empleado distintos procedimientos psicofísicos. El propósito de este trabajo fue el de evaluar la precisión de la representación mental y de las estrategias adoptadas para adquirir y retener la información del espacio visible en función de dos tipos de instrucciones. Treinta y ocho estudiantes universitarios y licenciados participaron en el estudio, distribuyéndose en las condiciones experimentales perceptiva y mnemónica. Se estimó el efecto de las instrucciones (intencionales e incidentales) sobre la representación de las distancias entre los objetos del escenario empleando los exponentes de la función potencial, basado en la reproducción de las distancias entre los estímulos del escenario. Los resultados mostraron que los juicios realizados bajo instrucciones intencionales se basaban con mayor frecuencia en estrategias relacionadas con la ubicación de los estímulos, mientras que los juicios bajo instrucciones incidentales se basaban en estrategias relacionadas con el nombre de los estímulos. Se observó que las instrucciones intencionales facilitaron una representación mental más precisa de la configuración experimental observada, mejorando la ejecución de los participantes.

Keywords

instructionsstrategiesvisuo-spatial perceptionmental representationspatial configurationinstruccionesestrategiaspercepción viso-espacialrepresentación mentalconfiguración espacial
Type
Monographic Section: Spatial Vision and Visual Space
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , November 2006 , pp. 312 - 320
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alba, J.W., & Hasher, L. (1983). Is memory schematic? Psychological Bulletin, 93, 203–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Algom, D. (1992). Memory psychophysics: An examination of its perceptual and cognitive prospects. In: Algom, D. (Ed.), Psychophysical approaches to cognition (pp. 441–513). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Algom, D., & Cain, W. S. (1991). Remembered odors and mental mixtures: Tapping reservoirs of olfactory knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 1104–1119.Google ScholarPubMed
Algom, D., Wolf, Y., & Bergman, B. (1985). Integration of stimulus dimensions in perception on memory: Composition rules and psychophysical relations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 451–471.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Asch, S.E. (1956). Studies in independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 70, (whole nr. 416).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baddeley, A. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556–559.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bolanowski, S.J., & Gescheider, G.A. (1991). Ratio scaling of psychological magnitude: A tribute to the memory of S. S. Stevens. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Clayton, K., & Chattin, D. (1989). Spatial and semantic priming effects in tests of spatial knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 495–506.Google Scholar
Da Silva, J.A. (1985). Scales for perceived egocentric distance in large open field: Comparisons of three psychophysical methods. American Journal of Psychology, 98, 119–146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Da Silva, J.A., & Macedo, L. (1982). A função-potência na percepção — significado e procedimento do cálculo do expoente. Arquivos Brasileiros de Psicologia, 34, 27–43.Google Scholar
Da Silva, J.A., Marques, S.L., & Ruiz, E.M. (1987). Subjective differences in exponents of psychophysical power functions for inferred, remembered, and perceived area. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 25, 191–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diwadkar, V.A., & McNamara, T.P. (1997). Viewpoint dependence in scene recognition. Psychological Science, 8, 302–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foley, J.M., Ribeiro-Filho, N.P., & Da Silva, J.A. (2004). Visual perception of extent and the geometry of visual space. Vision Resarch, 44, 147–156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Galera, C., & Fuhs, C.C.L. (2003). Memória visuo-espacial a curto prazo: os efeitos da supressão articulatória e de uma tarefa aritmética. Psicologia Reflexão e Crítica, 16, 337–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galera, C., & Marques, S.L. (2004). Quantidade e qualidade: duas abordagens da memória visuo-espacial, Revista Paidéia, 14, 17–24.Google Scholar
Helene, A.F., & Xavier, G.F. (2003). Construção da atenção a partir da memória. Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria, 25(Suppl. II), 12–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hershenson, M. (1998). Visual space perception: A primer. Cambrige, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hintzman, D.L. (2000). Memory judgments. In Tulving, E. & Craik, F.I.M. (Orgs.), The Oxford handbook of memory (pp. 149–162). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Izquierdo, I. (2004). A arte de esquecer: Cérebro, memória e esquecimento. Rio de Janeiro: Vieira e Lent.Google Scholar
Kemp, S. (1988). Memorial psychophysics for visual area: Effect of retention interval. Memory and Cognition, 6, 431–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerst, S.M., & Howard, J.H. (1978). Memory psychophysics for visual area and length. Memory and Cognition, 6, 237–335.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koler, P.A., & Rodiger, H.L. (1984). Procedures of mind. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 425–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koriat, A., Goldsmith, M., & Pansky, A. (2000). Toward a psychology of memory accuracy. Annual review of psychology, 51, 481–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krueger, L. (1989). Reconciling Fechner and Stevens: Toward a unified psychophysical law. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 251–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Light, L.L., & Zelinski, E.M. (1983). Memory for spatial information in young and old adults. Developmental Psychology, 19, 901–906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindsay, D.S., Johnson, M.K., & Kwon, P. (1991). Developmental changes in memory source monitoring. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 52, 297–318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loftus, E.F. (1975). Leading questions and the eyewitness report. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 560–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loftus, E.F., & Palmer, J.C. (1974). Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 585–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loomis, J.M. (2003). Visual space perception: Phenomenology and function. Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia, 66, 26–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marques, S.L., Eik, G., & Galera, C.A. (2000). Spatial perception: Perceptive and mnemonic estimations with different psychophysical procedures. International Journal of Psychology, 35, 143–143.Google Scholar
Marques, S.L., & Galera, C.A. (2002). The effect of arithmetic and visuo-spatial tasks on memory for items and their spatial locations. Presented at the 18th Annual Meeting of the International Society for Psychophysics - Fechner Day. Rio de Janeiro: Annual Meeting of International Society for Psychophysics, 18, 464–469.Google Scholar
Marques, S.L., Galera, C.A., & Cordioli, R. (2000). Interferência produzida por tarefas verbais e visuo - espaciais em estimativas perceptivas e mnemônicas. In XXX Reunião Anual da Sociedade Brasileira de Psicologia, Brasília. Livro de Resumos da XXX Reunião Anual da Sociedade Brasileira de Psicologia, 229.Google Scholar
Marques, S. L., Galera, C., & Eik, G. (2002). Efeito de tarefas intervenientes verbais e visuo-espaciais sobre estimativas mnemônicas em diferentes procedimentos psicofísicos. Arquivos Brasileiros de Psicologia, 52, 26–34.Google Scholar
Marsh, R.L., & Hicks, J.L. (1998). Test formats change source-monitoring decision processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1137–1151.Google Scholar
Moyer, R.S., Bradley, D.R., Sorensen, M.H., Whiting, J.C., & Mansfield, D. (1978). Psychophysical functions for perceived and remembered size. Science, 200, 330–332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olson, D.R., & Bialystok, E. (1983). Spatial cognition: The structure and development of mental representations of spatial relations. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Palmer, S.P. (1999). Vision science: Photons to phenomenology. Cambrige, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pezdek, K. (1983). Memory for items and their spatial locations by young and elderly adults. Developmental Psychology, 19, 895–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postma, A., & Haan, H.F.D. (1996). What was where? Memory for object location. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 178–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roediger, H.L., & McDermott, K.B. (2000). Distortions of memory. In Tulving, E. & Craik, F.I.M. (Orgs.), The Oxford handbook of memory (pp. 149–162). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepard, R. N., & Metzler, J. (1971). Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 171, 701–703.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simons, D.J., & Wang, R.F. (1998). Perceiving real-world viewpoint changes. Psychological Science, 9, 315–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, S.S. (1975). Psychophysics: Introduction to its perceptual, neural and social prospects. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Stevens, S.S., & Guirao, M. (1963). Subjective scaling of length and area and the matching of length to loudness and brightness. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 177–186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tversky, B. (2000). Remembering spaces. In Tulving, E. & Craik, F.I.M. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of memory (pp. 363–378). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Asselen, M., Fritschy, E., & Postma, A. (2006). The influence of intentional and incidental learning on acquiring spatial knowledge during navigation. Psychological Research, 70, 151–156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wagar, B.M., & Dixon, M.J. (2005). Past experience influences object representation in working memory. Brain and Cognition, 57, 248–256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, R.F., & Simons, D.J. (1999). Active and passive scene recognition across views. Cognition, 70, 191–210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed