4.4 Article

Turning bias in virtual spatial navigation: Age-related differences and neuroanatomical correlates

Journal

BIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 96, Issue -, Pages 8-19

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2013.10.009

Keywords

Aging; Brain volume; Brain asymmetry; MRI; Morris Water Maze

Funding

  1. National Institute on Aging [R37 AG011230]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Rodents frequently exhibit rotational bias associated with asymmetry in lesions and neurotransmitters in the striatum. However, in humans, turning preference is inconsistent across studies, and its neural correlates are unclear. We examined turning bias in 140 right-handed healthy adults (18-77 years old), who navigated a virtual Morris Water Maze. On magnetic resonance images, we measured volumes of brain regions relevant to spatial navigation. We classified turns that occurred during virtual navigation as veering (less than 10 degrees), true turns (between 10 degrees and 90 degrees) and course reversals (over 90 degrees). The results showed that performance (time of platform search and distance traveled) was negatively related to age. The distance traveled was positively associated with volume of the orbito-frontal cortex but not with the volumes of the cerebellum, the hippocampus or the primary visual cortex. Examination of turning behavior showed that all participants veered to the right. In turns and reversals, although on average there was no consistent direction preference, we observed significant individual biases. Virtual turning preference correlated with volumetric asymmetry in the striatum, cerebellum, and hippocampus but not in the prefrontal cortex. Participants preferred to turn toward the hemisphere with larger putamen, cerebellum and (in younger adults only) hippocampus. Advanced age was associated with greater rightward turning preference. Men showed greater leftward preference whereas women exhibited stronger rightward bias. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available