Spatial Visualization Training Using Interactive Animations

1
Spatial Visualization Training Using Interactive
Animations
Cheryl A. Cohen Mary Hegarty University of
California, Santa Barbara Department of
Psychology June 15, 2008
2
Research questions

• What is the potential for using interactive
  animation and virtual models to train spatial
  visualization skill?
• To what extent will training transfer?

3
Evidence for Mutability of Spatial Ability

• Baenninger Newcombe (1989)
• Two meta-analyses examined the contribution of
  experience to the development of spatial skill
• Correlational studies participation in spatial
  activities (sports, crafts and other hobbies) is
  positively related to scores on spatial ability
  measures
• Experimental studies performance on spatial
  ability tests can be improved through training
• Pre-postest and practice effect experiments

4
Spatial Visualization
Spatial visualization the ability to
understand, mentally encode and manipulate 3D
visuo-spatial forms (Carroll, 1993 Hegarty
Waller, 2005). Some spatial visualization
tasks involve relating 2D to 3D representations,
and vice versa. One such task is inferring a
cross section, which we define as a 2D slice of
a 3D object or form.
5
Cross sections in science education
6

• In previous research, we found that ability to
  infer and draw a cross-section of an anatomy-like
  object is correlated with spatial ability (Cohen,
  2005 Cohen Hegarty, 2007), r .59

7

• Experiment 1 Trained participants using 10
  interactive animations.
• Experiment 2 Trained participants using 4
  interactive animations.

8
Pre-post Measure

• 30-item multiple choice measure to examine
  sources of difficulty in inferring cross
  sectionsSanta Barbara
• Solids Test (SBST)
• Cronbachs a .86
• SBST performance correlated with spatial score, r
  .49

9
Pre-post Measure

• Dimensions of hypothesized difficulty
• Structural complexity (simple, joined or embedded
  figures)
• Orientation of cutting plane (orthogonal and
  oblique)

Simple orthogonal
Embedded oblique
Joined oblique
10
Test instructions
11
Santa Barbara Solids TestSample Problem
12
(No Transcript)
13
Experiment 1
(SBST) (.50 on pre-test)Pretest/ screening
Training (10 interactive animations)
Control (read non-fiction prose)
Posttest (SBST)
14
Experiment 1 Trained Figures
15
Drawing Trial
16
animation
17
Mental imagery

• Kosslyn (1980) Kosslyn, Brunn, Cave, Wallach
  (1984)
• images can be produced from
• recently acquired visual percepts
• verbal descriptions
• representations in long-term memory
• orientation-bound representation
• images in the short-term visuospatial buffer
  represent objects as seen from particular points
  of view
• Manipulating geometric forms and viewing the
  resulting images should improve participants
  performance by providing them with memories they
  can use in this task.

18
Motor processes mental imagery

• Wiedenbauer Jansen-Osmann (2008)
• Participants trained on mental rotation by
  rotating a joystick and simultaneously viewing
  images representing these rotations
• Authors attributed participants improved mental
  rotation performance at posttest to their
  congruent updating of movement and vision.
• Trained participants received online visual
  updating of the results of their manipulations of
  objects.

19
Training Effects

• Training effects were specific to trained stimuli
  and practiced transformations
• Kail Park (1990) accounted for this training
  effect by reference to instance theory (Logan,
  1988)
• Pani, Chariker, Dawson Johnson (2005)
  attributed participants performance gains in
  virtual reality environment to acquisition of
  spatial intuitions
• Spatial training generalized to transformations
  of new objects and new spatial transformations
• Wiedenbauer et al., (2008) Leone, Taine,
  Droulez (1993) Wallace Hofelich (1992)
• We investigated if training effects were specific
  to trained stimuli, or if they generalized to
  untrained figures.

20
Experiment 1
(SBST) (.50 on pre-test)Pretest/ screening
Training (10 interactive animations)
Control (read non-fiction prose)
Posttest (SBST)
21
Experiment 1 Predictions

• Experimental gt controls on posttest
• Across 30 test items
• 10 Trained items
• 17 Similar items
• 3 New items
• Greater reduction in egocentric errors for
  trained participants vs. controls

22
Similar problem
(The cross section of the Trained figure does not
appear in the cross section of Problem 15.)
(One shape in cross section of Problem 18 is the
cross section of the Trained figure)
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
Experiment 1 Discussion

• Training led to improved ability to identify
  cross sections of Trained figures
• Training also led to improved performance on
  complex figures.
• trained participants could identify trained cross
  sections as elements of novel, complex figures.
• Trained individuals rejected egocentric responses
  more frequently than controls.

26
Experiment 2
(SBST) (.50 on pre-test)Pretest/ screening
Training (4 interactive animations)
Control (read non-fiction prose)
Posttest (SBST)
27
Experiment 2 Trained Figures
28
Experiment 2 Predictions

• Experimental gt controls on posttest
• Across all (30) test items
• 4 Trained items
• 13 Similar items
• 13 New items
• Greater reduction in egocentric errors for
  trained participants vs. controls

29
plt.001
plt.001
plt.001
30
(No Transcript)
31
Experiment 2 Discussion

• Training to improved ability to identify cross
  sections of Trained figures
• Training led to improved performance on the
  Similar figures.
• Training led to improved performance on New
  figures
• Trained individuals rejected egocentric response.
  
• Limitation of Experiments 1 2
• Multiple choice format allows for process of
  elimination
• strategies
• Did not train on all possible views represented
  in test

32
General Discussion

• More evidence for mutability of spatial
  visualization
• Interactive animation using virtual geometric
  figures is an effective mode of training spatial
  visualization (inferring cross-sections)
• Trained participants
• Transferred learning on Trained shapes to a
  novel, more complex context Similar problems
• Transferred Trained shapes to New problems
• How did transfer occur?....

33
General Discussion

• Possible mechanisms of transfer to New figures
• Learned Trained cross sections (instance theory)
• Inferred New cross sections by
• noting similar features among test figures
  combining features of their cross sections
• process of elimination strategies

34
Implications Future Directions

• Insight into cognitive processes related to
  transfer of spatial learning
• Instance theory
• Comparison and inference
• Process of elimination
• Applications in science education
• Adapt training to specific domains of science
  education
• Level the playing field

35
Thanks to

• Mary Hegarty
• Jack Loomis
• Rich Mayer
• Russ Revlin
• Jerry Tietz

University of California, Santa
Barbara Department of Psychology