Dynamic spatial performance: sex and educational differences

Abstract A set of two dynamic tests were developed for measuring spatial orientation and spatial visualization (SODT and SVDT). These dynamic spatial tests were designed for computer administration. A printed battery including reasoning and spatial tests was also administered to a sample of 602 university graduates, 300 females (mean age=27.17) and 302 males (mean age=28.41). The participants were applicants for an air traffic control training program. Therefore, they were highly motivated to do their best. The present study is based on three main questions: (1) do the new dynamic spatial tests measure the same ability irrespective of sex?; (2) are performance differences between the sexes negligible for spatial tasks that closely resemble ‘real’ spatial orientation activities?; and (3) is type of education related to dynamic spatial performance? (to our knowledge, a question not directly addressed in the previous literature). The findings suggest that: (1) the factor structure is the same for both sexes; (2) males have an overall higher dynamic spatial performance than females; and (3) neither males’ nor females’ type of education makes any difference to their dynamic spatial performance. When males and females have the same type of education, dynamic spatial performance is still higher in males.

[1]  W Schiff,et al.  Accuracy of judging time to arrival: effects of modality, trajectory, and gender. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[2]  Susan D. Voyer,et al.  Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: a meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. , 1995, Psychological bulletin.

[3]  Roberto Colom,et al.  Individual differences in large-spaces orientation: g and beyond? , 2000 .

[4]  J. Carroll.  Psychometrics, intelligence, and public perception. , 1997 .

[5]  R. Colom,et al.  Sex differences in general intelligence defined as g among young adolescents , 2000 .

[6]  J. Carroll.  Human Cognitive Abilities-a sur-vey of factor-analytic studies , 1993 .

[7]  A. Jensen,et al.  Bias in Mental Testing , 1981 .

[8]  D. Lohman.  Spatial Ability: A Review and Reanalysis of the Correlational Literature. , 1979 .

[9]  Roberto Colom,et al.  Negligible sex differences in general intelligence , 2000 .

[10]  James W. Pellegrino,et al.  Using Interactive Computing to Expand Intelligence Testing: A Critique and Prospectus. Report No. 84-2. , 1984 .

[11]  John Schmid,et al.  The development of hierarchical factor solutions , 1957 .

[12]  R. Hanka,et al.  The scientific use of factor analysis: Raymond B. Cattell Plenum Press, £20.48 , 1981 .

[13]  Douglas N. Jackson,et al.  Dynamic spatial performance and general intelligence , 1993 .

[14]  A. Jensen,et al.  The g factor , 1996, Nature.

[15]  Gerald E. Larson,et al.  Gender differences in dynamic spatial abilities , 1996 .

[16]  J. Pellegrino,et al.  Perceptual and cognitive factors governing performance in comparative arrival-time judgments. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[17]  John J. McArdle,et al.  Current Directions in Structural Factor Analysis , 1996 .

[18]  F. Drasgow,et al.  Equivalence of computerized and paper-and-pencil cognitive ability tests: A meta-analysis. , 1993 .

[19]  C Loehlin John,et al.  Latent variable models: an introduction to factor, path, and structural analysis , 1986 .

[20]  James W. Pellegrino,et al.  The ability to reason about movement in the visual field , 1988 .

[21]  J. Pellegrino,et al.  Testing: Theoretical and Applied Perspectives , 1989 .

[22]  James W. Pellegrino,et al.  Comparing the Tortoise and the Hare: Gender Differences and Experience in Dynamic Spatial Reasoning Tasks , 1993 .

[23]  G E Larson,et al.  Mental rotation of static and dynamic figures , 1996, Perception & psychophysics.

[24]  Ronald Abate,et al.  A computer-based test battery for the assessment of static and dynamic spatial reasoning abilities , 1987 .