Search for: All records

Research on spatial thinking requires reliable and valid measures of individual differences in various component skills. Spatial perspective taking (PT)-the ability to represent viewpoints different from one's own-is one kind of spatial skill that is especially relevant to navigation. This study had two goals. First, the psychometric properties of four PT tests were examined: Four Mountains Task (FMT), Spatial Orientation Task (SOT), Perspective-Taking Task for Adults (PTT-A), and Photographic Perspective-Taking Task (PPTT). Using item response theory (IRT), item difficulty, discriminability, and efficiency of item information functions were evaluated. Second, the relation of PT scores to general intelligence, working memory, and mental rotation (MR) was assessed. All tasks showed good construct validity except for FMT. PPTT tapped a wide range of PT ability, with maximum measurement precision at average ability. PTT-A captured a lower range of ability. Although SOT contributed less measurement information than other tasks, it did well across a wide range of PT ability. After controlling for general intelligence and working memory, original and IRT-refined versions of PT tasks were each related to MR. PTT-A and PPTT showed relatively more divergent validity from MR than SOT. Tests of dimensionality indicated that PT tasks share one common PT dimension, with secondary task-specific factors also impacting the measurement of individual differences in performance. Advantages and disadvantages of a hybrid PT test that includes a combination of items across tasks are discussed. 

Configurations of support include those that exhibit Support-From-Below (cup on table), as well as those involving Mechanical Support (e.g., stamp on envelope, coat on hook). Mature language users show a “division of labor” in the encoding of support, frequently using basic locative expressions (BE on in English) to encode Support-From-Below but lexical verbs (e.g., stick, hang) to encode cases of Mechanical Support. This suggests that Support-From-Below configurations may best represent the core for the category of support, and could be privileged in supporting early mappings to spatial language. We tested this hypothesis by examining spontaneous productions of children younger than 4 years found in the CHILDES corpora. Children used on to encode Support-From-Below more than other types of support configurations. They also showed clear distinctions in how they mapped different verbs (e.g., BE vs. lexical verbs) to Support-From-Below configurations compared to other support configurations. Analysis of par-ent language suggests that these observed patterns in children’s language cannot be fully explained by input, although a role for input is likely for children’s encoding of Mechanical Support. Thus, a concept of Support-From-Below may serve as a core representation of support, and hence the privileged spatial representation onto which spatial language for support is mapped.