Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Sandamas, George
Languages: English
Types: Doctoral thesis
Theories of spatial learning, such as those of Siegal and White (1975) and Piaget and Inhelder (1967) have considered active exploration of environments to be beneficial or essential for the development of specific spatial knowledge. Real world empirical research in the form of both laboratory experimental and broader environmental studies tends to support this suggestion, demonstrating that active exploration of an environment, in both children and adults, gives better spatial learning than passive experience. Based on these findings, the working hypothesis adopted in this thesis is that active exploration of a virtual environment (VE) would also result in better spatial learning than passive experience of the same VE. Also considered is the equivalence of real and virtual world experiences, and the degree of transfer of spatial learning between VEs and real equivalent environments. Seven experiments were undertaken, all utilising a yoked active passive paired-subjects design. A range of VEs was employed across the experiments, including a room, a corridor, and both complex and simple small towns. Three studies used children as participants and five, adults, all having both males and females. The key finding was that the experimental hypothesis was supported for children but not for adults. Active child participants (when using a familiar input device) demonstrated superior spatial learning to that of their passive counterparts, but active adult participants did not show superior spatial learning to that of passive counterparts. Underestimation of distances was a universal feature, but was greater in female \ud than male participants. Otherwise, the general equivalence of real and virtual world experiences was confirmed, with transfer of spatial learning occurring from virtual environments to real world equivalent environments for both adults and children.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Acredolo, L. P. (1982).The familiarity factor in spatial research. New Directions for Child Develoment. 15,19-30.
    • Acredolo, L. P. Pick, H. L. and Olson, M. G. (1975). Environmental differentiationandfamiliarityas determinantsof children's memoryfor spatial location. DevelogmentalPsychology.11,495-501.
    • Aginsky, V. Harris, C. Rensink,R. and Beusmans,J. (1997). Two strategies for learning a routein a driving simulator. Journalof EnvironmentalPsychology. 17, 317-331.
    • Aguirre, G. K. Detre, J. A. Alsop, D. C. and D'Esposito, M- (1996). The parahippocampussubservestopographicallearning in man. CerebralCortex.
    • Akhutina, T. Foreman,N. Krichevets,A. Matikka, L. Narhi, V. Pylaeva,N. and Vahakuopus,J. (2003). Improvingspatialfunctioning in children with cerebral palsy using computerisedand traditional game tasks. Disability and Rehabilitation,25,1361-1371.
    • Andrews, H. F. (1973). Homerange and urban knowledgeof school-age children. Environmentand Behaviour. 5,73-86.
    • Allport, A. D. Antonis, B. Reynolds,P. (1972). On the division of attention: A disproof of the single channel hypothesis.QuarterlyJournal of Exgerimental Psycholoq . 24,225-235.
    • Appleyard, D. (1970). Stylesand methodsof structuringa city. Environmentand Behaviou , 2,100-116.
    • Arthur, E. J. (1996). Orientationspecificity in the mental representationof three dimensional environments. UngublishedDoctoral Dissertation, Universityo Minnesota-.
    • Arthur, E. J. Hancock, P. A. (2001). Navigationtraining in virtual environments.
    • InternationalJournalof CognitiveErgonomics. 5,387-400.
    • Astur, R. S. Ortiz, M. L. and Sutherland, R. J. (1998),A characterizationof performanceby men and women in a virtual Morriswater maze task: A large and reliablesex difference.BehaviouralBrain Research.93,185-190.
    • Aftree, E. A. Brooks, B. M. Rose, F. D. Andrews, T. K. Leadbefter,A. G. and Clifford, B. R. (1996). Memoryprocessesand virtual environments: I can't rememberwhat was there, but I can rememberhow I got there. Implicationsfor peoplewith disabilities. In P. M. Sharkey, (ed). Proceedingsof the I st EurogeanConferenceon Disability.Virtual Realityand Associated Technologies.Reading,UK: Universityof Reading, pp 117-121.
    • Brown, M. A.. and Broadway,M. J. (1981). The cognitive maps of adolescents: Confusion about inter-towndistances. ProfessionalGeographer.33,315-325.
    • Kuipers,B. (1978). Modellingspatialknowledge.CognitiveScience.2,129- 153.
    • When, T. andDohleC.(1995). Virtualrealityfor physicallydisabledpeople.
    • Computersin BiologyandMedicine2.5,205-211.
    • Ladd,F. C. (1970). Blackyouthsviewof theirenvironmentN:eighbourhood maps. EnvironmenatndBehaviour2.,64-79.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article