MULTIPLE FRAMES OF REFERENCE
Reply to Presson and Roepnack on Bryant on Space

Abstract

I am in agreement with Presson and Roepnack's (1992) main claim that not all learning situations provide equal spatial information with which to create a mental spatial model. I would, however, argue that the SRS model has the basis for explaining such learning effects.

Keywords

References

• Bryant, D. J. (1992) A Spatial Representation System in Humans. PSYCOLOQUY 3(16) space.1.
• Bryant, D. J., Tversky, B., & Franklin, N. (1992) Internal and external spatial frameworks for representing described scenes. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 74-98.
• Franklin, N., & Tversky, B. (1990) Searching imagined environments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 63-67.
• Haber, R. N. (1986) Toward a theory of the perceived spatial layout of scenes. In A. Rosenfeld (Ed.), Human and machine vision II. (pp. 109-148). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
• Presson, C. C., DeLange, N., & Hazelrigg, M. D. (1989) Orientation Specificity in spatial memory: What makes a path different from a map of the path? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 887-897.
• Presson, C. C., & Hazelrigg, M. D. (1984) Building spatial representations through primary and secondary learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 716-722.
• Presson, C. C., & Roepnack, B. R. (1992) Multiple mental models. PSYCOLOQUY 3(65) space.12
• Roepnack, B. R. (1991) Effects of orientation in dynamic imagined scenes. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Arizona State University.
• Sholl, J. M. (1987) Cognitive maps as orienting schemata. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 615-628.
• Sholl, J. M. (1992) Frames of reference used in accessing spatial knowledge. Paper presented at the 33rd annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, St. Louis, MO.