Do All Science Disciplines Rely on Spatial Abilities? Preliminary Evidence from Self-report Questionnaires

  • Mary Hegarty
  • Raymond D. Crookes
  • Drew Dara-Abrams
  • Thomas F. Shipley
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6222)

Abstract

Spatial abilities are correlated with success in science. However, research on this topic has not focused on possible differences in the spatial demands of different scientific fields. Furthermore, there is a partial dissociation between spatial abilities involved in dealing with the space of environments (large-scale spatial abilities) and those involved in dealing with the space of objects (small-scale spatial abilities). We used on-line self-report measures to collect preliminary data on the spatial abilities of scientists in different fields, as well as humanists and individuals in professional fields. Geoscientists had the highest self-report ratings of both environmental and small-scale spatial abilities, whereas geographers had relatively high self ratings of environmental spatial abilities and engineers had relatively high self ratings of small-scale spatial abilities. Other scientific disciplines did not differ from the mean in self reported spatial abilities. Self ratings of verbal ability were uncorrelated with self ratings of spatial abilities and, as expected, were highest for humanities specialists.

Keywords

spatial ability visualization scale science disciplines STEM fields 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Kozhevnikov, M., Motes, M., Hegarty, M.: Spatial visualization in physics problem solving. Cognitive Science 31, 549–579 (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sorby, S.A.: A course in spatial visualization and its impact on the retention of female engineering students. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering 7, 153–172 (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Coleman, S.L., Gotch, A.J.: Spatial perception skills of chemistry students. Journal of Chemical Education 75, 206–209 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Orion, N., Ben-Chaim, D., Kali, Y.: Relationship between earth-science education and spatial visualization. Journal of Geoscience Education 45, 129–132 (1997)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Casey, M.B., Nuttall, R.L., Pezaris, E.: Mediators of gender differences in mathematics college entrance test scores: A comparison of spatial skills with internalized beliefs and anxieties. Developmental Psychology 33, 669–680 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Peters, M., Chisholm, P., Laeng, B.: Spatial ability, student gender and academic performance. Journal of Engineering Edcuation 84, 69–73 (1995)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schueneman, A.L., Pickelman, J., Hesslein, R., Freeark, R.J.: Neuropsychological predictors of operative skill among general surgery residents. Surgery 96, 288–295 (1984)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Keehner, M.M., Tendick, F., Meng, M.V., Anwar, H.P., Hegarty, M., Stoller, M.L., Duh, Q.: Spatial ability, experience, and skill in laparoscopic surgery. The American Journal of Surgery 188, 71–75 (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shea, D.L., Lubinski, D., Benbow, C.P.: Importance of assessing spatial ability in intellectually talented young adolescents: A 20-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology 93, 604–614 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hegarty, M., Montello, D.R., Richardson, A.E., Ishikawa, T., Lovelace, K.: Spatial Abilities at Different Scales: Individual Differences in Aptitude-Test Performance and Spatial-Layout Learning. Intelligence 34, 151–176 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hegarty, M., Waller, D.: Individual differences in spatial abilities. In: Shah, P., Miyake, A. (eds.) Handbook of Visuospatial Thinking, pp. 121–169. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Montello, D.R.: Scale and multiple psychologies of space. In: Frank, A.U., Campari, I. (eds.) COSIT 1993. LNCS, vol. 716, pp. 312–321. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hegarty, M., Richardson, A.E., Montello, D.R., Lovelace, K., Subbiah, I.: Development of a self-report measure of environmental spatial ability. Intelligence 30, 425–447 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kozlowski, L.T., Bryant, K.J.: Sense-of-direction, spatial orientation, and cognitive maps. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 3, 590–598 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sholl, M.J., Kenny, R.J., Dellaporta, K.: Allocentric-heading recall and its relation to self-reported sense-of-direction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition 32, 516–533 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chatterjee, A.: The Neural Organization of Spatial Thought and Language. Seminars in Speech and Language 29, 226–238 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Crookes, R.D., Shipley, T.F., Hegarty, M.: Development of a self-report measure of spatial reasoning abilities. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association Meeting, Brooklyn, NY (March 2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Stieff, M.: Mental rotation and diagrammatic reasoning in science. Learning and Instruction 17, 219–234 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schwartz, D.L., Black, J.B.: Shuttling between depictive models and abstract rules: Induction and fall-back. Cognitive Science 20, 457–497 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kastens, K.: Synthesis of research on thinking & learning in the geosciences: Developing representational competence. Presented at the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America, October 18-21 (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mary Hegarty
    • 1
  • Raymond D. Crookes
    • 2
  • Drew Dara-Abrams
    • 1
  • Thomas F. Shipley
    • 2
  1. 1.University of CaliforniaSanta BarbaraUSA
  2. 2.Temple UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations