New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Language Trumps Innate Spatial Cognition

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Language seems to override an innate ability to understand spatial relations. Researchers compared Dutch adults and children, who describe a spatial relation from the point of view of the speaker, with a group of adults and children from a hunter-gatherer community in Namibia, who rely on a viewer-independent description of a space. Researchers hid a block under one of five cups in front of them and asked the subjects to find a similar block under their own set of five cups in front of them. The Dutch could locate the block more easily when it was placed in relation to the researcher (they may describe it as “the block to the left of the researcher”). The group from Namibia, however, fared better under absolute geocentric conditions (“the block is north of the researcher”). When four-year-old German children and great apes were tested, both preferred environment-centered processing. The difference between the German children and the eight-year-old Dutch kids who preferred egocentric directions suggests that language alters an innate preference, according to the study that appeared online October 30 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe