Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Spatial task solving on tablets: analysing mental and physical rotation processes of 12–13-year olds

Abstract

Spatial skill assessment and training are promising fields of application for tablets, as touch-based interaction can prime and support mental transformations of spatial knowledge. We report on a study with 49 secondary school students who used our iPad app to solve mental and physical rotation tasks. During physical rotation, students were able to rotate 3D stimuli using touch interaction. Results show specific similarities (e.g., regarding angular disparity effects) as well as differences between mental and physical conditions, such as for task success, mental effort, efficiency; all to the advantage of the physical condition. 12–13-year olds can benefit from these advantages without previous task training, whereas previous research showed this to be different for younger students. In a second step, our analysis compares low and high achievers regarding physical rotation behaviour and motivational variables, including expected success. The results lay grounds for constructing individualized, tablet-based training apps for spatial skills.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. Adams, D. M., Stull, A. T., & Hegarty, M. (2014). Effects of mental and manual rotation training on mental and manual rotation performance. Spatial Cognition and Computation,14(3), 169–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/13875868.2014.913050.

  2. American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist,57(12), 1060–1073.

  3. Ballard, D. H., Hayhoe, M. M., Pook, P. K., & Rao, R. P. N. (1997). Deictic codes for the embodiment of cognition. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences,20(4), 723–742. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X97001611. (discussion 743–767).

  4. Bertel S., Wetzel S., & Zander S. (2017). Physical touch-based rotation processes of primary school students. In T. Barkowsky, H. Burte, C. Hölscher, H. Schultheis (Eds.), Spatial Cognition X. Spatial Cognition 2016, KogWis 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 10523). Cham: Springer.

  5. Bethell-Fox, C. E., & Shepard, R. N. (1988). Mental rotation: Effects of stimulus complexity and familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,14(1), 12–23. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.14.1.12.

  6. Choi, H.-H., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (2014). Effects of the physical environment on cognitive load and learning: Towards a new model of cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 26(2), 225–244.

  7. Chu, M., & Kita, S. (2011). The nature of gestures’ beneficial role in spatial problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,140(1), 102–116. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021790.

  8. Clarke, B., & Svanaes, S. (2013). One-to-one Tablets in Secondary Schools: An Evaluation Study. Tablets for Schools.

  9. Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & Gross, M. U. M. (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back america’s brightest students. Public Opinion Quarterly,38(2), 261. https://doi.org/10.1086/268157.

  10. Eilers, E., Nachreiner, F., & Hänecke, K. (1986). SEA—Skala zur Erfassung subjektiv erlebter Anstrengung. Zeitschrift Für Arbeitswissenschaft,40, 215–224.

  11. Ekstrom, R. B., French, J. W., & Harman, H. H. (1976). Manual for the kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

  12. Funt, B. V. (1983). A parallel-process model of mental rotation. Cognitive Science,7(1), 67–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0364-0213(83)80018-4.

  13. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of the mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Book. https://doi.org/10.2307/3324261.

  14. Gardony, A. L., Taylor, H. A., & Brunyé, T. T. (2014). What does physical rotation reveal about mental rotation? Psychological Science,25(2), 605–612. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613503174.

  15. Goldin-Meadow, S., Levine, S. C., Zinchenko, E., Yi Yip, T. K., Hemani, N., & Factor, L. (2012). Doing gesture promotes learning a mental transformation task better than seeing gesture. Developmental Science,15(6), 876–884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2011.08.021.Secreted.

  16. Hamrick, J. B., & Griffiths, T. L. (2014). What to simulate? Inferring the right direction for mental rotation. In: Annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 577–582).

  17. Hegarty, M., & Waller, D. (2004). A dissociation between mental rotation and perspective-taking spatial abilities. Intelligence,32(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2003.12.001.

  18. Ifenthaler, D., & Schweinbenz, V. (2013). The acceptance of Tablet-PCs in classroom instruction: The teachers’ perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior,29(3), 525–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHB.2012.11.004.

  19. Isen, A. M., & Reeve, J. (2005). The influence of positive affect on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: Facilitating enjoyment of play, responsible work behavior, and self-control. Motivation and Emotion,29(4), 297–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-006-9019-8.

  20. Jansen, P., Schmelter, A., Quaiser-Pohl, C., Neuburger, S., & Heil, M. (2013). Mental rotation performance in primary school age children: Are there gender differences in chronometric tests? Cognitive Development,28(1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2012.08.005.

  21. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1976). Eye fixations and cognitive processes. Cognitive Psychology,8(4), 441–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(76)90015-3.

  22. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1985). Cognitive coordinate systems: Accounts of mental rotation and individual differences in spatial ability Individual Differences in Spatial Ability. Psychological Review,92(2), 137–172.

  23. Khooshabeh, P., & Hegarty, M. (2010). Representations of shape during mental rotation. In: 2010 AAAI spring symposium series, (May), (pp. 15–20).

  24. Khooshabeh, P., Hegarty, M., & Shipley, T. F. (2012). Individual differences in mental rotation: Piecemal versus holistic processing. Experimental Psychology,60, 164–174. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000184.

  25. Kirsh, D., & Maglio, P. (1994). On distinguishing epistemic from pragmatic action. Cognitive Science,18(4), 513–549.

  26. Peters, M., & Battista, C. (2008). Applications of mental rotation figures of the Shepard and Metzler type and description of a mental rotation stimulus library. Brain and Cognition,66(3), 260–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2007.09.003.

  27. Reilly, D., Neumann, D. L., & Andrews, G. (2017). Gender differences in spatial ability: Implications for STEM education and approaches to reducing the gender gap for parents and educators. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Visual-spatial ability: Transforming research into practice (pp. 195–224). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44385-0_10.

  28. Rheinberg, F., Vollmeyer, R., & Burns, B. D. (2001). FAM: Ein Fragebogen zur Erfassung aktueller Motivation in Lern- und Leistungssituationen. Diagnostica,47(2), 57–66. https://doi.org/10.1026//0012-1924.47.2.57.

  29. Roberts, J. E., & Bell, M. A. (2002). The effects of age and sex on mental rotation performance, verbal performance, and brain electrical activity. Developmental Psychobiology,40(4), 391–407. https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.10039.

  30. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications. New York: Routledge.

  31. Shepard, R. N., & Metzler, J. (1971). Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science,171, 701–703.

  32. Shoemake, K. (1992). ARCBALL: A user interface for specifying three-dimensional orientation using a mouse. Graphics Interface,92, 151–156.

  33. Smith, I. M. (1964). Spatial ability: Its educational and social significance. London: University of London Press.

  34. Streiner, D. L. (2003). Starting at the beginning: An introduction to coefficient alpha and internal consistency. Journal of Personality Assessment,80(1), 99–103. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA8001_18.

  35. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Measuring cognitive load. In Cognitive load theory. Explorations in the learning sciences, Instructional systems and performance technologies (Vol. 1, pp. 71–85). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4.

  36. Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022193728205.

  37. Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016127.

  38. Wiedenbauer, G., & Jansen-Osmann, P. (2008). Manual training of mental rotation in children. Learning and Instruction,18(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.09.009.

  39. Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,9(4), 625–636. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196322.

  40. Xue, J., Li, C., Quan, C., Lu, Y., Yue, J., & Zhang, C. (2017). Uncovering the cognitive processes underlying mental rotation: an eye-movement study. Scientific Reports,7(1), 10076. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-10683-6.

  41. Zander, S., Wetzel, S., & Bertel, S. (2016). Rotate it! – Effects of touch-based gestures on elementary school students’ solving of mental rotation tasks. Computers & Education, 103, 158–169.

  42. Zhang, J., & Norman, D. (1994). Represesentations in distributed cognitive tasks. Cognitive Science,18, 87–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(94)90021-3.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Stefanie Wetzel.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. The used iPad app was exclusively developed for the internal use during the experiments. The app is not available for users outside our lab. The authors did not receive any commercial or reputational benefit for the app.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wetzel, S., Bertel, S., Montag, M. et al. Spatial task solving on tablets: analysing mental and physical rotation processes of 12–13-year olds. Education Tech Research Dev 68, 363–381 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09699-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Spatial skill assessment
  • Mental and physical rotation
  • Differences in physical rotation behaviour
  • Secondary school students