• Yi-Chun Chen
  • Fang-Ying YangEmail author


There were two purposes in the study. One was to explore the cognitive activities during spatial problem solving and the other to probe the relationship between spatial ability and science concept learning. Twenty university students participated in the study. The Purdue Visualization of Rotations Test (PVRT) was used to assess the spatial ability, whose items were divided into different types of problems with respect to the rotation angles and levels of plane invisibility. The eye tracking technology and the interview technique were employed to analyze subjects’ the online cognitive processes and problem solving strategies. Students’ concept gains were examined by content analysis after reading a science report. The result shows that, first, the interview analysis shows that students of different PVRT performances employed different problem solving strategies. Second, rotation angles as well as levels of plane invisibility inserted significant effects on the online processes and performances of the spatial problem solving. Third, the accuracy performance of PVRT was correlated with eye movement patterns. At last, it was found that concept performance was not correlated with PVRT performance but associated with spatial memory and problem solving strategies.

Key words

3D mental rotation eye movements eye tracking science learning spatial ability spatial problem solving 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Blazhenkova, O. & Kozhevnikov, M. (2010). Visual-object ability: A new dimension of non-verbal intelligence. Cognition, 117(3), 276–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bodner, G. M., & Guay, R. B. (1997). The purdue visualization of rotation test. The Chemical Educator, 2(4).Google Scholar
  3. Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: a survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Eliot, J., & Smith, I. M. (1983). An international directory of spatial tests. Windsor, England: NFER/Nelson; and Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
  5. French, J. W. (1951). The description of aptitude and achievement tests in terms of rotated factors. Psychometric Monographs, No. 5.Google Scholar
  6. Gagné, E. D., Yekovich, C. W. & Yekovich, F. R. (1993). The cognitive psychology of school learning (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Harper-Collins.Google Scholar
  7. Guilford, J. P. & Lacey, J. I. (1947). Printed classification tests, A.A.F. Aviation Psychological Progress Research Report, No. 5. Washington: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  8. Hegarty, M. (2010). Components of spatial intelligence. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 52, 265–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hegarty, M. & Just, M. A. (1993). Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. Journal of memory and language, 32(6), 717–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hegarty, M., Richardson, A. E., Montello, D. R., Lovelace, K. & Subbiah, I. (2002). Development of a self-report measure of environmental spatial ability. Intelligence, 30(5), 425–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hegarty, M. & Waller, D. (2006). Individual differences in spatial abilities. In P. Shah & A. Miyake (Eds.). Handbook of Visuospatial Thinking. (pp.121-169). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Höffler, T. N. (2010). Spatial ability: Its influence on learning with visualizations—a meta-analytic review. Educational psychology review, 22(3), 245–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Höffler, T. N. & Leutner, D. (2011). The role of spatial ability in learning from instructional animations–Evidence for an ability-as-compensator hypothesis. Computers in human behavior, 27(1), 209–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Just, M. A. & Carpenter, P. A. (1985). Cognitive coordinate systems: Accounts of mental rotation and individual differences in spatial ability. Psychological Review, 92, 137–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kyllonen, P. C., Lohman, D. F. & Woltz, D. J. (1984). Componential modeling of alternative strategies for performing spatial tasks. Journal of Educational Psychology, 6, 1325–1345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lohman, D. F. (1979). Spatial ability: A review and reanalysis of the correlational literature (Tech. Rep. No. 8). Stanford, CA: Stanford University School of Education.Google Scholar
  17. Lohman, D. F., Pellegrino, J. W., Alderton, D. L., & Regian, J. W. (1987). Dimensions and components of individual differences in spatial abilities. In S. H. Irvine & S. E. Newstead (Eds.), Intelligence and cognition: Contemporary frames of reference (pp. 253-312). Springer Netherlands.Google Scholar
  18. Mathewson, J. H. (1999). Visual-spatial thinking: an aspect of science overlooked by educators. Science Education, 83(1), 33–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Michael, W. B., Guilford, J. P., Fruchter, B. & Zimmerman, W. S. (1957). The description of spatial-visualization abilities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 17, 185–199.Google Scholar
  20. Mumaw, R. J., Pellegrino, J. W., Kail, R. V. & Carter, P. (1984). Different slopes for different folks: Process analysis of spatial aptitude. Memory & Cognition, 12(5), 515–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Onyancha, R. M., Derov, M. & Kinsey, B. L. (2009). Improvements in spatial ability as a result of targeted training and computer-aided design software use: Analyses of object geometries and rotation types. Journal of Engineering Education, 98(2), 157–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ozcelik, E., Arslan-Ari, I. & Cagiltay, K. (2010). Why does signaling enhance multimedia learning? Evidence from eye movements. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(1), 110–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457–1506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rohde, T. E. & Thompson, L. A. (2007). Predicting academic achievement with cognitive ability. Intelligence, 35(1), 83–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Shepard, R. N. & Metzler, J. (1971). Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 171(3972), 701–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sternberg, R. J. (2009). Cognitive psychology (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  27. Stieff, M. (2007). Mental rotation and diagrammatic reasoning in science. Learning and Instruction, 17(2), 219–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Thurstone, L. L. (1950). Some primary abilities in visual thinking. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 94(6), 517–521.Google Scholar
  29. Tsai, J. L., Yen, M. H. & Wang, C. A. (2005). Eye movement recording and the application in research of reading Chinese. Research in Applied Psychology, 28, 91–104.Google Scholar
  30. Uttal, D. H., & Cohen, C. A. (2012). Spatial thinking and STEM education: When, Why, and How? In B. Ross (Ed.), Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 57, pp. 147–181). Oxford: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  31. Wai, J., Lubinski, D. & Benbow, C. (2009). Spatial ability for STEM domains: Aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 817–835.Google Scholar
  32. Yang, F. Y., Chang, C. Y., Chien, W. R., Chien, Y. T. & Tseng, Y. H. (2013). Tracking learners’ visual attention during a multimedia presentation in a real classroom. Computers & Education, 62, 208–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zhang, L. F. (2004). Field-dependence/independence: cognitive style or perceptual ability? - validating against thinking styles and academic achievement. Personality and Individual Differences, 37(6), 1295–1311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zimmerman, W. S. (1954). Hypotheses concerning the nature of the spatial factors. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 14, 396–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate Institute of Science EducationNational Taiwan Normal UniversityTaipei 116Taiwan

Personalised recommendations