Spatial navigation strategy in older adults: Preference or ability?

IF 3.5 1区 心理学 Q1 GERONTOLOGY
Psychology and Aging Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-21 DOI:10.1037/pag0000896
Adam J Barnas, Jeffrey T Kunath, Eliany Perez, Zachary Boogaart, Dawn Bowers, Natalie C Ebner, Steven M Weisberg
{"title":"Spatial navigation strategy in older adults: Preference or ability?","authors":"Adam J Barnas, Jeffrey T Kunath, Eliany Perez, Zachary Boogaart, Dawn Bowers, Natalie C Ebner, Steven M Weisberg","doi":"10.1037/pag0000896","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Spatial navigation strategies change in aging. Whereas younger adults use more shortcuts (place-based strategies), older adults use more familiar routes (response-based strategies). Does this bias in older adults reflect a preference for familiar routes or deficits in the ability to take shortcuts? We tested this question by providing an instructions-based intervention in which participants were told to take shortcuts rather than follow a learned route. We predicted that when instructed to do so, participants would increase shortcut taking overall, but older adults to a lesser extent than younger adults, supporting the notion that preference, rather than an inability to use place-based strategies, underlies the predilection for response-based strategies in older age. Younger (<i>n</i> = 64) and older (<i>n</i> = 65) adults completed two sessions of a desktop virtual navigation strategy task in which they could navigate to goal locations following a familiar route or taking a novel shortcut. In the first session, all participants received the instruction to navigate to goal locations. In the second session, half received the same instruction as before and the other half was instructed to take shortcuts. We computed participants' tendency toward place- or response-based strategies in each session. We replicated the finding that younger adults took more shortcuts when instructed; however, counter to our prediction, the instruction manipulation had no effect in older adults. These findings suggest that navigation strategy in younger adults is flexible and may reflect preference, whereas older adults more rigidly adhere to familiar routes, implying impaired or degraded survey knowledge. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48426,"journal":{"name":"Psychology and Aging","volume":" ","pages":"462-478"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12289431/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology and Aging","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000896","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Spatial navigation strategies change in aging. Whereas younger adults use more shortcuts (place-based strategies), older adults use more familiar routes (response-based strategies). Does this bias in older adults reflect a preference for familiar routes or deficits in the ability to take shortcuts? We tested this question by providing an instructions-based intervention in which participants were told to take shortcuts rather than follow a learned route. We predicted that when instructed to do so, participants would increase shortcut taking overall, but older adults to a lesser extent than younger adults, supporting the notion that preference, rather than an inability to use place-based strategies, underlies the predilection for response-based strategies in older age. Younger (n = 64) and older (n = 65) adults completed two sessions of a desktop virtual navigation strategy task in which they could navigate to goal locations following a familiar route or taking a novel shortcut. In the first session, all participants received the instruction to navigate to goal locations. In the second session, half received the same instruction as before and the other half was instructed to take shortcuts. We computed participants' tendency toward place- or response-based strategies in each session. We replicated the finding that younger adults took more shortcuts when instructed; however, counter to our prediction, the instruction manipulation had no effect in older adults. These findings suggest that navigation strategy in younger adults is flexible and may reflect preference, whereas older adults more rigidly adhere to familiar routes, implying impaired or degraded survey knowledge. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

老年人空间导航策略:偏好还是能力?
空间导航策略随着年龄的增长而改变。年轻人更多地使用捷径(基于地点的策略),而老年人使用更熟悉的路线(基于反应的策略)。老年人的这种偏好反映的是对熟悉路线的偏好还是缺乏走捷径的能力?我们对这个问题进行了测试,提供了一个基于指导的干预,参与者被告知走捷径,而不是遵循已知的路线。我们预测,当被指示这样做时,参与者总体上会增加走捷径的次数,但老年人比年轻人的程度要小,这支持了这样一种观点,即老年人对基于地点的策略的偏好,而不是无法使用基于地点的策略,是对基于反应的策略的偏好的基础。年轻的(n = 64)和年长的(n = 65)成年人完成了两个桌面虚拟导航策略任务,他们可以沿着熟悉的路线或走一条新的捷径导航到目标地点。在第一阶段,所有参与者都收到了导航到目标位置的指令。在第二阶段,一半的人接受了与之前相同的指示,另一半则被指示走捷径。我们计算了参与者在每次会议中对基于地点或基于反应的策略的倾向。我们重复了这一发现:年轻人在受到指示时更倾向于走捷径;然而,与我们的预测相反,指令操作对老年人没有影响。这些发现表明,年轻人的导航策略是灵活的,可能反映了偏好,而老年人更严格地坚持熟悉的路线,这意味着受损或退化的调查知识。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
10.80%
发文量
97
期刊介绍: Psychology and Aging publishes original articles on adult development and aging. Such original articles include reports of research that may be applied, biobehavioral, clinical, educational, experimental (laboratory, field, or naturalistic studies), methodological, or psychosocial. Although the emphasis is on original research investigations, occasional theoretical analyses of research issues, practical clinical problems, or policy may appear, as well as critical reviews of a content area in adult development and aging. Clinical case studies that have theoretical significance are also appropriate. Brief reports are acceptable with the author"s agreement not to submit a full report to another journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信