Ambiguity in Acquiring Spatial Representation from Descriptions Compared to Depictions: The Role of Spatial Orientation

Taylor, Holly A.; Uttal, David H.; Fisher, Joan A.; Mazepa, Marshall

doi:10.1007/3-540-45424-1_19

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Both axes have processing difficulties associated with them, including the symmetry of the left/right axis (Clark 1973) and the response variability and language differences in defining front and back using the relative frame (Hill 1982). The latter of these difficulties appears to have dominated responses in these studies, thereby validating empirical findings of response variability in defining front and back (Taylor et al 2001b).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Where is the donut? Factors influencing spatial reference frame use

Taylor

Rapp

2004

Cogn Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Because different reference frames can be used to describe a simple spatial situation such as the relationship between two objects, spatial descriptions can be confusing and/or ambiguous. To reduce this difficulty, do people assume a particular reference frame when interpreting spatial descriptions? If so, does the makeup of the spatial scene affect this assumption? Does cognitive load interact with this assumption? In three experiments, we examined reference frame use and how situational and cognitive factors interact with spatial description interpretation. The main cognitive factor involved memory load, i.e., whether responses were made from memory or not. From the features of the scene (object-facing direction, located object position) emerged two interactions of interest. First, since objectfacing direction has implications for the cognitive strategies used to determine spatial relations, we assessed how object facing interacted with reference frame use. Second, we assessed how the descriptive axes associated with multiple reference frames influenced reference frame use. The results indicated that people predominantly use the intrinsic reference frame. Yet, despite this tendency, cognitive and situational variables also affected responses, both alone and in combination. These findings suggest that people maintain cognitive flexibility when interpreting spatial descriptions to reduce or inform potential ambiguities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

“…Other languages make different assumptions about reference object orientation (Hill 1982). While linguists have posited these assumptions, behavioral evidence suggests greater variance in interpreting these terms (Taylor et al 2001b). …”

Section: Descriptive Term Axis Discrepancy and Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Where is the donut? Factors influencing spatial reference frame use

Taylor

Rapp

2004

Cogn Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research subsequent to the meta-analysis has supported its broad thesis. For example, it has been shown that being in school is associated with greater spatial growth in elementary school children than being on summer vacation (Huttenlocher, Levine, & Vevea, 1998) and that various manipulations can help children learn spatial tasks (Taylor, Uttal, Fisher, & Mazepa, 2001;Uttal, Fisher, & Taylor, in press).…”

Section: Spatial Ability Can (Fairly Easily) Be Vastly Improvedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Taking Science Seriously: Straight Thinking About Spatial Sex Differences.

Newcombe

Why Aren't More Women in Science?: Top Researchers Debate the Evidence.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sex differences in spatial functioning are frequently the source of cocktail party conversation and entertaining cartoons. These anecdotes and images feature such figures as men who forge intrepidly into the wild armed only with a compass and an innate sense of direction and ditzy women who hold maps upside down and depend on the kindness of strangers. These figures of fun, although exaggerated, have some basis in truth. Studies using standardized tests have found support for the belief that men have strengths in the spatial domain, sometimes quite marked strengths. For example, the average American man has an ability to perform mental rotation of a threedimensional object that exceeds that of the average American woman by half a standard deviation or more (Linn & Petersen, 1985;Voyer, Voyer, & Bryden, 1995; for the statistically uninitiated, such differences are considered moderate to large and may well be obvious to the casual observer). There are similarly substantial sex-related differences on tests of mechanical reasoning, which involve a large spatial component (Feingold, 1995). Furthermore, and consistent with remarks made in January 2005 by Lawrence Summers, the president of Harvard University, these differences are often most 69

show abstract

Ambiguity in Acquiring Spatial Representation from Descriptions Compared to Depictions: The Role of Spatial Orientation

Cited by 2 publications

References 18 publications

Where is the donut? Factors influencing spatial reference frame use

Where is the donut? Factors influencing spatial reference frame use

Taking Science Seriously: Straight Thinking About Spatial Sex Differences.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About