Advertisement

Cognitive Processing

, Volume 16, Issue 2, pp 203–209 | Cite as

No sex differences in the TAMI

  • Christopher R. MadanEmail author
  • Anthony Singhal
Short Report

Abstract

The Test of Ability in Movement Imagery (TAMI; Madan and Singhal in J Mot Behav 45:153–166, 2013) has recently been developed as an objective measure for evaluating individual ability in movement imagery. Other tests of imagery have reported sex differences, including the mental rotations test (MRT) and the Vividness of Movement Imagery Questionnaire (VMIQ). However, some have attributed these observed sex differences to other processes, such as difference in spatial abilities and confidence. Here, we tested for sex differences in the TAMI in a large sample of young adults (N = 246). In the same sample, we also administered a modified version of the MRT that included both block configurations and human figures and the VMIQ2. This modified MRT was used, as the imagery processes involved in the TAMI may be more similar to those involved in the rotations of human figures. While strong sex differences were found in both subscales of the modified MRT, no sex differences were observed in the TAMI.

Keywords

Movement imagery Sex differences Mental rotations Mental imagery 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to think Sylvia Romanowska for assistance with data collection. We would also like to thank Dr. Gerianne Alexander for providing us with the modified mental rotations test from Alexander and Evardone (2008). This research was partly funded by a Discovery grant and a Canada Graduate Scholarship, both from the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada, held by AS and CRM, respectively.

References

  1. Alexander GM, Evardone M (2008) Blocks and bodies: sex differences in a novel version of the mental rotations test. Horm Behav 53:177–184CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Annett J (1995) Motor imagery: perception or action? Neuropsychologica 33:1395–1417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ashton R, White KD (1980) Sex differences in imagery vividness: an artifact of test. Br J Psychol 71:35–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Campos A, Pérez MJ (1988) Vividness of movement imagery questionnaire: relations with other measures of mental imagery. Percept Mot Skills 67:607–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Coluccia E, Louse G (2004) Gender differences in spatial orientation: a review. J Environ Psychol 24:329–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ganis G, Keenan JP, Kosslyn SM, Pascual-Leone A (2000) Transcranial magnetic stimulation of primary motor cortex affects mental rotation. Cereb Cortex 10:175–180CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Isaac AR, Marks DF (1994) Individual differences in mental imagery experience: developmental changes and specialization. Br J Psychol 85:479–500CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Isaac AR, Marks DF, Russell DG (1986) An instrument for assessing imagery of movement: the vividness of movement imagery questionnaire (VMIQ). J Ment Imag 10:23–30Google Scholar
  9. Jansen P, Lehmann J (2013) Mental rotation performance in soccer players and gymnasts in an object-based mental rotation task. Adv Cogn Psychol 9:92–98CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Linn MC, Petersen AC (1985) Emergence and characterization of sex differences in spatial ability: a meta-analysis. Child Dev 56:1479–1498CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Madan CR, Singhal A (2012) Motor imagery and higher-level cognition: four hurdles before research can sprint forward. Cogn Process 13:211–229CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Madan CR, Singhal A (2013) Introducing TAMI: an objective test of ability in movement imagery. J Mot Behav 45:153–166CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Madan CR, Singhal A (2014) Improving the TAMI for use with athletes. J Sports Sci 32:1351–1356CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. McKelvie SJ (1986) Effects of format of the vividness of visual imagery questionnaire on content validity, split-half reliability, and the role of memory in test-retest reliability. Br J Psychol 77:229–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Munzert J, Lorey B, Zentgraf K (2009) Cognitive motor processes: the role of motor imagery in the study of motor representations. Brain Res Rev 60:306–326CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Olivetti Belardinelli M, Palmiero M, Sestieri C, Nardo D, Di Matteo R, Londei A, Romani GL (2009) An fMRI investigation on image generation in different sensory modalities: the influence of vividness. Acta Psychol 132:190–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Parsons TD, Larson P, Kratz K, Thiebaux M, Bluestein B, Buckwalter JG, Rizzo AA (2004) Sex differences in mental rotation and spatial rotation in a virtual environment. Neuropsychologia 42:555–562CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Peters M, Laeng B, Latham K, Jackson M, Zaiyouna R, Richardson C (1995) A redrawn Vandenberg and Kuse mental rotations test: different versions and factors that affect performance. Brain Cogn 28:39–58CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Richardson JTE (1994) Gender differences in mental rotation. Percept Mot Skills 78:435–448CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Roberts R, Callow N, Hardy L, Markland D, Bringer J (2008) Movement imagery ability: development and assessment of a revised version of the vividness of movement imagery questionnaire. J Sport Exerc Psychol 30:200–221PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Shepard RN, Metzler J (1971) Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science 171:701–703CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Tomasino B, Borroni P, Isaja A, Rumiati RI (2005a) The role of the primary motor cortex in mental rotation: a TMS study. Cogn Neuropsychol 22:348–363CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Tomasino B, Budai R, Mondani M, Skrap M, Rumiati RI (2005b) Mental rotation in a patient with an implanted electrode grid in the motor cortex. NeuroReport 16:1795–1800CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Vandenberg SG, Kuse AR (1978) Mental rotations: a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization. Percept Mot Skills 47:599–604CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Voyer D (2011) Time limits and gender differences on paper-and-pencil tests of mental rotation: a meta-analysis. Psychon Bull Rev 18:267–277CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Voyer D, Voyer S, Bryden MP (1995) Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: a meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. Psychol Bull 117:250–270CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Wolpert DM, Ghahramani Z, Flanagan JR (2001) Perspectives and problems in motor learning. Trends Cogn Sci 5:487–494CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Hooven CK, Chabris CF, Ellison PT, Kievit RA, Kosslyn SM (unpublished) The sex difference on mental rotation is not necessarily a difference in mental rotation abilityGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Marta Olivetti Belardinelli and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  2. 2.Department of Psychology, Neuroscience and Mental Health InstituteUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada

Personalised recommendations