4.7 Article

Implicit versus explicit processing of visual, olfactory, and multimodal landmark information in human wayfinding

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY
卷 14, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1285034

关键词

wayfinding; recognition; implicit processing; olfaction; spatial cognition

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the focus on visual perception, recent research has shown that humans can use their sense of smell for orientation, especially when processed implicitly.
Despite the predominant focus on visual perception in most studies, the role of humans' sense of smell in navigation has often been neglected. Recent research, however, could show that humans are indeed able to use their sense of smell for orientation, particularly when processed implicitly. In this study, we investigate whether implicit perception of olfactory landmarks enhanced wayfinding performance compared to explicit perception. Fifty-two people completed a wayfinding and a recognition task in a virtual maze at two times of testing 1 month apart. Participants either received olfactory, visual, or both cues at the intersections. Wayfinding performance was better for olfactory landmarks, which were not correctly remembered in the recognition task. In contrast, wayfinding performance was better when visual landmarks were correctly remembered. In the multimodal condition, wayfinding performance was better with landmarks being remembered at t1 and remained the same at t2. Our results suggest distinct implicit processing mechanisms within the olfactory system and therefore hold important implications for the nature of spatial odor processing extending beyond explicit odor localization tasks. The study highlights the importance for future studies to develop and employ further experimental methods that capture implicit processing across all of our senses. This is crucial for a comprehensive understanding of consciousness, as olfaction strongly influences our behavior, but remains largely latent unless deliberately honed through practice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据