Putting things into perspective

ABSTRACT

In this editorial for the special issue on visual perspective in memory and imagination we provide an overview of the articles by highlighting four main themes. First, we describe how visual perspective influences the characteristics of memories and imagined events. Second, we examine how visual perspective influences the individual remembering and/or imagining. Third, we describe the multiple locations where visual perspectives can be located within mental representations. Fourth, we discuss how we construct multiple visual perspectives during mental representations. We conclude with some of the exciting avenues for future directions in the field.

KEYWORDS:

• Visual perspective
• memory
• imagination
• episodic memory
• autobiographical memory

“I’d like to see things as you see them,” she said. “Look at myself through your eyes while you’re painting me. I think I’d understand myself better if I did that. And you’d probably understand me better too.” -Haruki Murakami, Killing Commendatore, p. 406

To have a mental image in memory or imagination, one needs to occupy a specific visual perspective, or vantage point, within the scene (Rubin & Umanath, 2015). As this special issue on visual perspective in memory and imagination highlights, the visual perspective adopted during mental imagery profoundly impacts how past events are constructed and future events are simulated. This quote from Murakami further exemplifies that our viewpoint can also in turn determine how we construe our personal identities. Nigro and Neisser (1983) were the first to formally draw attention to the existence of different visual perspectives in autobiographical memories, which they separated into field and observer perspectives. Field perspectives are reconstructed from the viewpoint of one's own eyes and meant to reflect the original field of view, whereas observer perspectives afford a view of oneself “from the outside” as if from a bystander's point of view. Viewpoint is sometimes described using different terminology such as own eyes and observer perspectives or first-person and third-person perspectives – all of which are used in the articles included in the special issue. However, unlike the viewpoint Murakami's character wishes to adopt, observer perspectives in the context of the special issue do not involve taking another person's perspective. Both own eyes and observer-like perspectives are egocentric spatial representations because they configure mental scenes based on the relationship between oneself and objects in the environment, as opposed to allocentric representations that represent a scene based on object-to-object relationships. As suggested by St. Jacques (2021) we prefer the terms own eyes and observer-like perspective, which are more descriptive of the nature of visual perspective.

In this special issue we bring together a broad range of studies that showcase the many ways visual perspective impacts memory and imagination in the context of ageing (Kapsetaki et al., 2021), culture (Suo & Wang, 2021), mental time travel (i.e. autonoetic consciousness; Zaman & Russell, 2021), psychological well-being (Janssen et al., 2021; Niese et al., 2021; Warne & Rice, 2021), reviewing photographs of oneself (Marcotti & St. Jacques, 2021), out-of-body experiences (Bergouignan et al., 2021), language and reading (Gander & Gander, 2021), and spatial memory precision (Heywood-Everett et al., 2020). The diverse perspective of the special issue also makes these ten articles relevant to a broad audience beyond memory and imagination. In this editorial, we summarise the articles along three main themes as described below.

1. The role of visual perspective on the characteristics of events

Having a particular viewpoint, irrespective of whether it is own eyes or observer-like, is thought to be a necessary feature of event memory (Rubin & Umanath, 2015). However, the particular visual perspective adopted during memory and imagination also influences subjective aspects of events that contribute to recollection (for reviews see Rice, 2010; St. Jacques, 2019, 2021). For example, observer-like perspectives are associated with reduced vividness in memories (e.g. Butler et al., 2016; Talarico & Rubin, 2003) and episodic simulations of future events (e.g. D’Argembeau & Van der Linden, 2012; McDermott et al., 2016). In this special issue, Zaman and Russell (2021) question whether autonoetic consciousness, the sense of self associated with mental time travel to the personal past and future, necessarily requires having an own eyes perspective. They argue that since memories are typically experienced from an own eyes perspective that retrieving them from this same perspective should better support autonoetic consciousness. This raises an important question of whether the match between encoding and retrieval (i.e. encoding specificity) is the critical factor or whether it is the particular viewpoint adopted that matters. Own eyes perspectives by nature are privy to experiential aspects of memory and imagination, as well as a sense of psychologically closeness compared to observer-like perspectives (e.g. Tausen et al., 2020). As we discuss in more detail below, memories encoded from an observer-like perspective are associated with reductions in subjective aspects of remembering (Bergouignan et al., 2021). Zaman and Russell (2021) suggest that delineating the relationship between autonoetic consciousness and visual perspective requires understanding the neural basis of viewpoint in memory and they highlight recent evidence for the role of posterior parietal cortex. We would argue that unravelling the relationship between autonoetic consciousness and viewpoint will also require targeting memories that are formed from both own eyes and observer-like perspectives.

Visual perspective also influences objective aspects of memory, such as the number of episodic details in narratives (Akhtar et al., 2017; King et al., 2021) and the accuracy of memory recall (Marcotti & St. Jacques, 2018). In this special issue, Marcotti and St. Jacques (2021) examine how visual perspective during retrieval influences the accuracy of the spatial aspects of memory. In this study, participants encoded memories for a series of lifelike mini-events involving interaction with objects on a tray. Roughly one-week later, participants were asked to retrieve memories cued by photographs of the mini-events from the same own eyes perspective as encoding or from an observer-like perspective. Two days later, participants were tested on their subsequent memory for the spatial location of the objects on the tray for each mini-event. Marcotti and St. Jacques (2021) found that shifting to an observer-like perspective reduced the overall accuracy of spatial memory when compared to maintaining an own eyes perspective. Better understanding the multiple ways that viewpoint impacts the characteristics of memories is relevant to forensic settings in which perspective shifts are used in the cognitive interview to target more accurate eyewitness memories (Geiselman et al., 1984). Additionally, the potential to change memories through a simple shift in viewpoint and to see the future from a new perspective can contribute to the well-being of the individual remembering and imagining these events as we discuss below.

2. The role of visual perspective on the individual remembering/imagining

Visual perspective not only influences the characteristics of events, but also the individual who is remembering or imagining. Perhaps the most notable consequences of adopting a particular visual perspective in a mental scene relate to how it affects the self-concept and well-being of the individual doing the remembering or imagining. As Niese et al. (2021) point out, own eyes and observer-like perspectives represent different social cognitive processes that influence the level of meaning extracted from an event. Own eyes perspectives focus an individual on internal physical and mental reactions, partly based on how they felt at as the event was experienced, and partly biased on beliefs they hold about themselves that shaped their experiential reactions in the first place. Thus, deliberately adopting an own eyes perspective in memory can lead to greater awareness of implicitly biased self-beliefs and be used as a tool in imagination or future simulation to better understand how they affect one's behaviour (Libby et al., 2014; Niese et al., 2019; 2021). In contrast, observer-like perspectives offer a reflection of how one appears to other people, which leads to an evaluation of whether one's conduct is in line with societal and/or personal standards (Niese et al., 2021). In both cases, the focus is on interpreting the abstract meaning of an event beyond the concrete, physically experienced details and comparing one's behaviour to culturally and individually determined expectations.

Consequently, visual perspective can be used to emotionally regulate how we feel about events, thereby affecting psychological well-being. For example, Janssen et al. (2021) found that the more individuals adopted an own eyes perspective during autobiographical memory retrieval, the stronger they were able to re-experience the event, which increased the feeling of psychological closeness to it. Similarly, Suo and Wang (2021) report that adopting an observer perspective during the retrieval of positively valanced memories is associated with poorer psychological well-being among individuals from a European American background. Together, these findings suggest that positive memories should be retrieved from an own eyes perspective to feel psychologically closer to them, and negative memories should be retrieved from an observer perspective to feel distanced from them, at least in Western cultures.

The relationship between visual perspective and well-being applies to those affected by clinical disorders such as depression and post-traumatic stress disorder, as well as healthy individuals. For example, Warne and Rice (2021) show how the tendency to favour observer perspectives when recalling memories or imagining future events is linked to the severity of depression symptoms among individuals with a high familial risk of major depressive disorder. Their results fit with previous research showing that individuals suffering from depression tend to recall past events from an observer-like perspective to a greater degree than healthy controls (Begovic et al., 2017; Kuyken et al., 2006; Lemogne et al., 2006). Similarly, individuals with post-traumatic stress disorder tend to retrieve memories from an observer-like perspective (Dawson & Bryant, 2016; Kenny et al., 2009; Kenny & Bryant, 2007; McIsaac & Eich, 2004; St. Jacques et al., 2011; Williams & Moulds, 2007; Williams & Moulds, 2008), and symptom severity is positively correlated with observer perspective imagery (Kenny et al., 2009). Observer perspective imagery in depression and post-traumatic stress disorder is commonly understood as a coping strategy to emotionally regulate the appraisal of an event by reducing negative emotions and increasing psychological distance (Macrae et al., 2016; Mcisaac & Eich, 2002, 2004; Neise & Libby, 2021; Skowronski et al., 2015; Williams & Moulds, 2007, 2008). However, avoiding negative emotions in memories can hinder cognitive processing and lead to a failure to integrate the event within one's self-concept (McIsaac & Eich, 2004). Further, there are several instances where observer-like perspectives can increase as opposed to flatten emotional intensity during memory and imagination (Libby & Eibach, 2011; Neise & Libby, 2021), or lead to increased well-being (Suo & Wang, 2021). For example, when picturing negative future events, observer perspectives were linked with increased well-being among individuals from an Asian American background, implying that the opportunity to see one's predicted behaviour from an outside perspective may have helped individuals to mentally prepare for upcoming scenarios and possible pitfalls, ultimately enhancing well-being (Suo & Wang, 2021).

In sum, visual perspective provides a means of emotional regulation and a way to reframe the meaning of an event, which ultimately impacts well-being. Own eyes perspectives lead one to focus on internal physical and mental reactions experienced as the event took place, coloured by self-beliefs (Niese et al., 2021), which increases recollective experience and promotes psychological closeness to an event (Janssen et al., 2021). In contrast, observer-like perspectives, by providing a picture of how one appears to the outside world, leads to an evaluation of whether one's behaviour lives up to expectations set by society and oneself (Niese et al., 2021). When anticipating the future, observer perspective imagery can simulate how one's actions would be interpreted and thereby enhance general well-being, at least when picturing negative events and in Asian American cultures (Suo & Wang, 2021). However, sometimes measuring one's behaviour in light of pre-existing standards can lead to adverse consequences for well-being, such as in the context of depression (Warne & Rice, 2021).

3. The location of observer-like perspectives in mental scenes

There are many possible observer perspectives available within a given mental scene, but what exactly determines which one is adopted? By asking participants to directly specify the height (i.e. below eye level, eye level, above eye level), distance (less than six feet, greater than six feet), and location (behind, alongside, in front; right, left, centre) of their experienced perspective, previous research has shown that where an observer-like perspective is located in space is influenced by the type of event being retrieved or imagined (McDermott et al., 2016; Rice & Rubin, 2011). For example, public speaking engagements tend to be recalled as if from the perspective of an audience member where one is visible from the front, whereas running from a threatening situation tends to be recalled from a perspective above and behind oneself (Rice & Rubin, 2011).

In this special issue, two studies employ this method pioneered by Rice and Rubin (2011) to shed new light on the location of observer-like perspectives within mental scenes. First, the aforementioned study by Marcotti and St. Jacques (2021) reveals how the ubiquitous act of viewing photos of past events biases the spatial location of the visual perspective adopted during remembering. The authors found that viewing third-person photographs led participants to adopt this same visual perspective during subsequent remembering. This finding has wide implications in current society due to the widespread use of social media; it implies that the way we document and rehearse events in our lives, as opposed to strictly the events themselves, biases how we will remember them. Second, Gander and Gander (2021) apply the concept of visual perspective to reading and suggest a potential mechanism that allows individuals to separate factual from fictional events. Participants were asked to imagine short stories that were either labelled as fact or fiction and written using first- or third-person pronouns and provided subjective ratings of the viewpoint they adopted during mental imagery. After a short delay, they were asked to recall all the stories and to subjectively rate the viewpoint they adopted. They found that imaging factual as opposed to fictional stories lead participants to adopt an observer-like perspectives that was more aligned with the protagonist. Gander and Gander (2021) also point out that asking multiple questions about observer-like perspective could bias participants to report a higher number of observer perspectives than they would under natural circumstances (McDermott et al., 2016). In sum, by asking participants to report exactly where in the mental scene their vantage point is experienced from, this special issue reveals how observer perspectives tend to align with photos we have previously seen of ourselves from past events (Marcotti & St. Jacques, 2021) and to protagonists we read about while visualising factual stories (Gander & Gander, 2021).

Alternatively, the spatial location of observer perspectives can be measured as a function of how far they have drifted from their original own eyes perspective. Here, Heywood-Everett et al. (2020) present their newly developed paradigm where they investigate how precise rotations away from the visual perspective experienced at encoding impact egocentric (i.e. self-to-object relationship) and allocentric (i.e. object-to-object) spatial memory. Participants studied an array of objects arranged on a rotating table. They were later presented with an object array viewed from either the same perspective as during the study phase or a novel rotated observer-like perspective and were asked to indicate whether the array was the same or different compared to the study phase (Experiment 1) or which object had been moved (Experiment 2). Using a psychophysical approach, the authors demonstrated that spatial memory accuracy decreased as the mismatch between the original and observer-like perspective increased.

Thus, this special issue highlights how different ways of measuring the location of observer perspectives lead to different insights into the way they influence our memory and imagination. By asking participants to pinpoint the exact location within a mental scene an observer perspective is experienced from, Marcotti and St. Jacques (2021) reveal how photos depicting observer-like perspectives bias memory retrieval from that same perspective, while Gander and Gander (2021) show how reading factual stories leads to a tendency to visualise the mental scene from a perspective that is centred on the protagonist. In contrast, by shifting visual perspective away from the original encoding perspective, Heywood-Everett et al. (2020) demonstrate how our ability to correctly remember the spatial layout of a scene is dependent on how far away our visual perspective has drifted from the vantage point we experienced it from in the first place. However, events are rarely retrieved from memory or conjured by imagination from an exclusively own eyes or observer perspective. Next, we will consider how this special issue advances understanding of our ability to construct multiple visual perspectives within the same mental simulation.

4. The construction of multiple visual perspectives during mental simulation

Visual perspective influences how we construct mental models of events. A classic example of this is reflected in patients with hemineglect who omit the left side of space when imagining a familiar location such as the Piazza del Duomo from one vantage point but can then recover these details if their perspective is shifted 180-degrees (Bisiach & Luzzatti, 1978). Although much work has examined how manipulating perspective influences remembering and imagining (for review see St. Jacques, 2019), much less is understood about the crucial role that viewpoint plays in how memories are initially formed. In this special issue, Kapsetaki et al. (2021) address this question by examining how young and older adults encode visual perspective in episodic memory. Participants were asked to wear a head mounted camera while encoding physical objects presented within an array shown from different viewing angles. Then participants were given a recognition memory test in which they were presented with pictures of the scene and asked to indicate whether the objects were previously presented, with “yes” responses followed by a question about whether the picture was from the same viewing angle as the image from their head camera. The authors found that older adults were impaired on correctly recognising viewpoint, replicating a prior study using the identical task (Russell et al., 2019). In a second study, they used similar method that instead presented 2D stimuli on a computer screen and found no age-related differences in correctly recognising visual perspective. Kapsetaki et al. (2021) interpreted these findings as reflecting age-related difficulties in constructing and later representing a 3D mental scene from a particular viewpoint, thereby impacting the ability of older adults to correctly recognise viewpoint in episodic memory for 3D but not 2D stimuli. An important future direction will be to directly compare age-related differences in visual perspective in memories for 3D versus 2D stimuli. Nonetheless, these findings highlight the important contribution of viewpoint to constructing mental representations within immersive environments.

According to the constructive episodic simulation hypothesis (Schacter & Addis, 2007) novel perspectives during retrieval and imagination occur because both processes rely on the constructive nature of our episodic memory system (also see Schacter, 2021). Constructive encoding approaches to memory further propose that observer experiences may also originate during the formation of memories as mental imagery, prior knowledge, and other internal reflections are brought to bear on our perceptual experiences (McCarroll, 2018). These ideas pick up on ones suggested by Nigro and Neisser’s (1983) seminal work in which they proposed the possibility of “observer experiences” that lead to the creation of “observer memories” (p. 469). Cultural differences in visual perspective also lend support to the idea that viewpoint in events can be constructed based on how prior knowledge shapes memories. For example, compared to Western or individualistic groups, Eastern cultures and interdependent groups have a higher frequency of observer-like perspectives when they are asked to think about events in which they are the centre of the scene (Cohen & Gunz, 2002). In the special issue, Suo and Wang (2021) further highlight how culture can play a role in the frequency and nature of how multiple visual perspectives are constructed when imagining future events.

Other research has taken the approach of developing innovative methods to manipulate own eyes and observer-like perspectives during memory encoding using immersive virtual reality technology. For example, in a recent study, Iriye and St. Jacques (2021; study 2) manipulated first and third-person avatar perspectives during encoding within an immersive virtual reality setting in which they created bespoke avatars that resembled participants. They found that virtual events experienced from a third-person avatar perspective were later remembered from a stronger observer-like than own eyes perspective, and that these effects persisted when memories were tested one week later. In this special issue, Bergouignan et al. (2021) replicate these findings taking a different approach in which they created an out-of-body illusion in a real-world context. Participants wore a virtual reality headset that was either fed from a 360-degree camera located at an own eyes perspective or placed at an observer-like location such that they would see themselves in real-time within the context of the event. To foster the out-of-body illusion, they also manipulated embodiment at the location of the illusory body by using a standardised method involving multisensory feedback by presenting synchronous visual and sensory information. Thus, participants experienced an embodied perspective in which they saw themselves from an observer-like perspective while experiencing an interview-style event in real-time in the lab. Consistent with Iriye and St. Jacques (2021), they found that memories formed from an out-of-body perspective were later remembered from an observer-like perspective. Interestingly, Bergouignan et al. (2021) further demonstrated that viewpoint during retrieval was not related to reductions in subjective recollection as the result of adopting an out-of-body perspective, suggesting that the changes in viewpoint originated during memory encoding rather than reflecting phenomenological changes that occurred during memory retrieval. An important future direction will be to distinguish the role of embodiment and visual perspective in contributing to the formation of memories from observer-like perspectives. These novel approaches to manipulating viewpoint during encoding have great potential to fill the gap in our understanding about the nature of observer memories, and also important implications for understanding the origin of increased observer-like perspectives in PTSD (e.g. McIsaac & Eich, 2004).

5. Conclusion

This special issue on visual perspective in memory and imagination reveals the multiple ways that visual perspective influences cognition and the advances made in the field since Nigro and Neisser’s (1983) first empirical study. At the same time these ten articles also raise a number of questions and future directions for research in this area. Given the impact that visual perspective can have on both the characteristics of events and well-being of the individual constructing these mental representations, more research is needed to understand how long lasting these effects are and the contribution of individual differences in the ability to adopt multiple viewpoints. While much research has focused on how viewpoint influences the characteristics of individual events, less is known about how visual perspective influences how events are understood within the broader context of our lives. Evidence that we can adopt multiple viewpoints within mental representations of space lead to questions about how we oscillate among and combine these multiple views. Understanding the role of perspective during memory encoding has just begun and has the potential to fill in many gaps regarding the nature of observer-like perspectives in events. This special issue brings together leaders in the field of visual perspective who have made great advances in this area and whose research generates many other exciting questions and future directions to discover.

Acknowledgements

Putting together a special issue in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic was not easy. We thank all the authors and reviewers who contributed to this special issue, Esther Fujiwara for editorial assistance, and Linden Ball for his great support through this process. We also thank Chloe I. King for assistance with editing the reference section. We acknowledge that some of this work was conducted on Treaty 6 territory, a traditional gathering place for diverse Indigenous peoples including the Cree, Blackfoot, Metis, Nakota Sioux, Iroquois, Dene, Ojibway/Saulteaux/Anishinaabe, Inuit, and many others whose histories, languages, and cultures continue to influence our vibrant community. We also acknowledge the support of funding from the Canada Research Chairs Program and Discovery Grant from the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (RGPIN-2019-06080, DGECR-2019-00407) awarded to Peggy L. St. Jacques. This content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the funding sources.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

There is no data associated with this manuscript, because it is an editorial.

Additional information

Funding

We also acknowledge the support of funding from the Canada Research Chairs Program and Discovery Grant from the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (RGPIN-2019-06080, DGECR-2019-00407) awarded to Peggy L. St. Jacques.