Huttenlocher,
  J., Vasilyeva M. (2009). How toddlers represent enclosed spaces. Cognitive
    Science, 27, 749-766.
  
  
@Article{HuttenlocherVasilyeva2003,
  
  author =      {Huttenlocher, Jannellen and Vasilyeva, Marina},
  
  title =       {How toddlers represent enclosed spaces},
  
  journal =     {Cognitive Science},
  
  year =        {2003},
  
  volume =      {27},
  
  pages =       {749--766}
    
}
  
  
  
  
· There is yet to be a unified understanding of how spatial representations work for humans and animals
· Visual cues and their relation to spatial recognition
· Perspective in regards to spatial recognition
· Effects of disorientation in object locating tasks
· Theory of spatial development [p.750]
· Disorienting animals (rats) and ability to locate objects [p.751]
· Space-centered conceptualization [p.751]
· Geometrical cues for spatial representation and locating objects [p.752]
· Perseveration effects [p.756]
· Isosceles triangle room experiment
· Rectangular room experiment
· Viewers position – inside vs. Outside perspective
· Spatial recognition by - relationship among its parts [p.757]
  
Spatial cognition and how organisms
  store spatial representations are still vaguely defined and understood.
  
Two views of spatial representations:
  metric and relative stimuli in the environment, and fragmented.
  
“Piaget believed that representations of
  space are not conceptualized independently of the observer” [p.750] Distance
  and length are not stored as initial stimuli. These claims would lead to
  children having very bad perception and identification of their surroundings.
  
Studies show young children use visual
  cues such as distance of an object or the shape to determine location in a
  closed area. (Huttenlocher, Newcombe, & Sandberg. 1994)
  
Their experiment shows that initial
  viewing position does not dictate determining an object in a closed area. They
  also showed that children use distance and length to encode locations of
  objects.
  
Spelke provides evidence that children
  are capable of encoding lengths of walls and using the geometry of the room to
  locate objects in space. Even after disorientation the subjects are able to
  recall the geometry of the space.  This
  is done by referencing the varying lengths of the walls of the rectangular room,
  with which they are able to distinguish between the varying corners.
  
Disorientation tasks and possible
  reasons for success
  
  
  1.      
  
  Viewing
    perspective
  
  
  2.      
  
  space
    representation is independent of original viewing perspective
  
To further study the spatial
  representations of children behaviours apparent during object locating was
  studied. This is key to understanding how children locate objects in an
  enclosed space.
  
Gouteux experimentation shows that there
  is a difference between the children’s relation to the closed space if they are
  (physically) inside or outside that space.
  
Both triangle spaces and rectangular
  spaces are tested to see how children react to differing geometric spaces for
  locating an object.
  
  
Experiment 1 – Triangle enclosed area
  (all the following experiments performed on toddlers 20-24 months of age)
  
1a  Child placed within a triangular room, object
  hid in a constant location
  
1b  Child placed within a triangular room, object
  hid in a variable location
  
Two trials are run, the second trial to
  test whether the child can use geometric cues to identify locations within the
  room.
  
Study shows that geometric cues are
  indeed used to identify the hiding place of an object. Angular cues are did not
  play a significant role in finding the hidden objects (isosceles triangle room).
  
Perseveration: is when the child remembers
  where the object was previously so attempts to locate it in the same spot. Perseveration
  hinders ability to locate objects in the trials.
  
The Children’s ability to locate the
  object is increased if constant locations are used (experiment 1a).
  
Observed behaviour gives evidence that
  children go directly to the corner which they believe has the object rather than
  survey the enclosed area. This points to earlier hypothesis that children
  represent space relative to its parts and not initial location.
  
  
Experiment 2 – Triangle enclosed area
  
Studied whether children can perform the
  same tasks if placed outside the enclosed space.
  
Although accuracy is lower children are
  still able to perform object locating tasks even if they are out of the
  enclosed area.
  
Experiment 3 – Rectangular enclosed area
  
Studied whether children can perform object
  location but this time with a rectangular area, viewing was done from outside
  the enclosed area much like experiment 2.
  
Results further confirm findings in
  experiment 2. Children are capable of finding objects even if they are not
  physically in the enclosed area.
  
  
Values from the inside vs outside are different
  due to the vantage points of the child relative to the object. In one it is
  physically in the room so the geometry is different compared to observing the
  same dimensions from outside.
  
“The model we are proposing holds that there are various levels at which the viewer may be included in the representation of a space.” [p.764]