MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3169419777

The Octagon Navigation Task Reveals Sex Differences in Spatial Ability

2018· article· en· W3169419777 on OpenAlexaff
Kate Chua

Bibliographic record

VenueURSCA Proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpatial memoryTask (project management)PsychologySpatial learningMorris water navigation taskSpatial cognitionCognitive psychologySpatial abilityOrientation (vector space)Cognitive mapCognitionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceWorking memoryNeuroscienceMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Morris Water Maze (MWM) is commonly used in research for investigating spatial cognition and hippocampal-dependent learning in nonhuman animals. One of the most consistent findings in the literature is the male advantage in spatial ability. Usually, the MWM is adapted as a virtual reality for testing in humans. In our lab, we constructed a real-world navigation task and found that by default, men implemented an allocentric strategy whereas women adopted an egocentric strategy when finding the target location. Based on these findings, the present study designed a table-top version of the MWM. The goal of each subject is to locate a hidden target by navigating on an octagonal board using different spatial navigation strategies. The allocentric condition experiment tested 60 subjects (30 women) ages 18-25 and examined their ability to find a hidden target located relative to constant environmental room cues. Results revealed that men outperformed women on this task. In the egocentric condition experiment, 60 subjects (28 women) were directed to find a target location that remained consistent with respect to their body axis and starting position in the experiment. Women outperformed men in the egocentric condition experiment. In the neutral condition, the target was located in the center of the board and could be found using either egocentric or allocentric strategy, which resulted in no sex differences. Our results suggest that when a spatial task requires competition between two sources of information, an egocentric strategy appears more prominent in women whereas an allocentric strategy appears more prominent in males. Future work may use fMRI to see if sex differences in spatial navigation will correlate to differences in functional connectivity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueURSCA ProceedingsSame topicSpatial Cognition and NavigationFrench-language works237,207