Spatial abilities at different scales: Individual differences in aptitude-test performance and spatial-layout learning
By Mary Hegarty, Daniel R. Montello, Anthony E. Richardson, Toru Ishikawa, Kristin L. Lovelace. 2006
826 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Automotive Engineering, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Geography, Planning and Development
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b1a0455662c5554944ec1461cbe549b42a4a23d0
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Automotive Engineering
In Geography, Planning and Development
Citations in the corpus
- A Heuristic Framework of Spatial Ability: a Review and Synthesis of Spatial Factor Literature to Support its Translation into STEM Education (2018, neutral): “…is a significant body of evidence illustrating its association with perspective taking, memory and spatial skills such as spatial relations and visualisation (Allen et al. 1996; Fields and Shelton 2006; Hegarty et al. 2006; Ishikawa and Montello 2006; Kozhevnikov et al. 2006; Weisberg et al. 2014).”
- Why Some Students Have Trouble with Maps and Other Spatial Representations (2005, background): “In the Hegarty et al. (2004) study, there was a significant difference in the mean performance for males and females on the mental rotations test: on average, males (n = 90, mean score = 22.5) did better than females (n = 143, mean score = 17.6), t(231) = 5.72, p < .001.”