bioRxivNeurosciencePreprint
Comparable human spatial memory distortions in physical, desktop virtual and immersive virtual environments
Fiona ZischiD, Coco NewtoniD, Antoine CoutrotiD, María Murcia-López, Anisa Motala, Jacob GreavesiD, William de CothiiD, Anthony J. SteediD, Nick TyleriD, Stephen A. GageiD, Hugo J. SpiersiD
Abstract
Boundaries define regions of space and are integral to episodic memories. The impact of boundaries on spatial memory and neural representations of space has been extensively studied in freely-moving rodents. But less is known in humans and many prior studies have employed desktop virtual reality (VR) which lacks the body-based self-motion cues of the physical world, diminishing the potentially strong input from path integration to spatial memory. We replicated a desktop-VR study testing the impact of boundaries on spatial memory (Hartley et al., 2004) in a physical room (2.4m x 2.4m, 2m tall) by having participants (N = 27) learn the location of a circular stool and then after a short delay replace it where they thought they had found it. During the delay, the wall boundaries were either expanded or contracted. We compared performance to groups of participants undergoing the same procedure in a laser-scanned replica in both desktop VR (N = 44) and freely-walking head mounted display (HMD) VR (N = 39) environments. Performance was measured as goodness of fit between the spatial distributions of group responses and seven modelled distributions that prioritised different metrics based on boundary geometry or walking paths to estimate the stool location. The best fitting model was a weighted linear combination of all the geometric spatial models, but an individual model derived from place cell firing in Hartley et al. 2004 also fit well. High levels of disorientation in all three environments prevented detailed analysis on the contribution of path integration. We found identical model fits across the three environments, though desktop VR and HMD-VR appeared more consistent in spatial distributions of group responses than the physical environment and displayed known variations in virtual depth perception. Thus, while human spatial representation appears differentially influenced by environmental boundaries, the influence is similar across virtual and physical environments. Despite differences in body-based cue availability, desktop and HMD-VR allow a good and interchangeable approximation for examining human spatial memory in small-scale physical environments.
- organism: human
- assay: spatial transcriptomics
- research focus: spatial domain detection
- research focus: benchmarking
- approach: statistical model
- Citations
- 9
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Deforming the metric of cognitive maps distorts memory
Jacob L. S. Bellmund, William de Cothi, … Christian F. Doeller·Nature Human BehaviourPeer-reviewed·Nov 18, 2019
- Locomotion-dependent use of geometric and body cues in humans mapping 3D space
Volker Reisner, Theo A. J. Schäfer, … Christian F. Doeller·Proceedings of the National Academy of SciencesPeer-reviewed·Dec 19, 2025
- Change-resistance distinguishes the representational geometries of human spatial memory and mouse CA1 in deformed environments
Diana M. Green, David G. Behery, … Alexandra T. Keinath·bioRxiv·Jul 9, 2025
- Bodily Action Shapes Spatial Representation: Evidence from Virtual Reality, Sensory Augmentation and Map Learning
- Boundaries in Spatial Cognition: Looking like a Boundary is More Important than Being a Boundary
J. Negen, A. Sandri, … M. Nardini·Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and CognitionPeer-reviewed·Jun 1, 2020
- Studying Spatial Memory in Augmented and Virtual reality
Shachar Maidenbaum, Ansh Patel, … Joshua Jacobs·bioRxiv·Sep 23, 2019