TY - JOUR
T1 - Sources of individual differences in spatial visualization ability
AU - Salthouse, Timothy A.
AU - Babcock, Renee L.
AU - Mitchell, Debora R.D.
AU - Palmon, Roni
AU - Skovronek, Eric
N1 - Funding Information:
Spatial visualization is similar to, but distinct, in factor analytic studies (e.g., Michael et al., 1950; Michael, Zimmerman, & Guilford, 1951), from the abili- This research was supported by NIA Grant AG006858 to T. Salthouse. We would like to thank Robert Kail and Christopher Hertzog for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript. Correspondence and requests for reprints should be sent to Timothy Salthouse, School of Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332.
PY - 1990
Y1 - 1990
N2 - Two experiments are reported in which different batteries of specially designed spatial tasks were administered to male college students. The subjects were selected to be either high or relatively low in spatial visualization ability as assessed by performance on four paper-and-pencil tests (Paper Folding, Surface Development, Form Board, and Cube Comparisons). Three hypotheses proposed to account for individual differences in spatial visualization ability were investigated. These hypotheses attribute differences in spatial visualization ability to variations in: (a) representational quality, (b) transformational efficiency, and (c) preservation of representations during transformations. The failure to find differences related to spatial visualization ability in the accuracy of recognition memory decisions and in the speed of transformations is inconsistent with the first two hypotheses. The evidence was somewhat mixed with respect to the preservation-under-transformation hypothesis, but it does appear that spatial visualization differences are most pronounced when some information must be preserved while the same or other information is being processed.
AB - Two experiments are reported in which different batteries of specially designed spatial tasks were administered to male college students. The subjects were selected to be either high or relatively low in spatial visualization ability as assessed by performance on four paper-and-pencil tests (Paper Folding, Surface Development, Form Board, and Cube Comparisons). Three hypotheses proposed to account for individual differences in spatial visualization ability were investigated. These hypotheses attribute differences in spatial visualization ability to variations in: (a) representational quality, (b) transformational efficiency, and (c) preservation of representations during transformations. The failure to find differences related to spatial visualization ability in the accuracy of recognition memory decisions and in the speed of transformations is inconsistent with the first two hypotheses. The evidence was somewhat mixed with respect to the preservation-under-transformation hypothesis, but it does appear that spatial visualization differences are most pronounced when some information must be preserved while the same or other information is being processed.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=38249020117&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=38249020117&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/0160-2896(90)90004-D
DO - 10.1016/0160-2896(90)90004-D
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:38249020117
SN - 0160-2896
VL - 14
SP - 187
EP - 230
JO - Intelligence
JF - Intelligence
IS - 2
ER -