Analogue Mental Transformations in 3-Year-Olds: Introducing a New Mental Rotation Paradigm Suitable for Young Children

Krüger, Markus; Kaiser, Marlen; Mahler, Kristin; Bartels, W.; Krist, Horst

doi:10.1002/icd.1815

Cited by 22 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some researchers have used manipulation tasks to study MR in toddlers between 2 and 5 years of age [3,63,64]. The goal of these tasks was to manually rotate an object into the same orientation as a reference object, to its upright (canonical) position, or so that it would fit through an aperture.…”

Section: Box 1 Distinctive Stimulus Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of mental transformation abilities

Frick

Möhring

Newcombe

2014

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mental representation and transformation of spatial information is often examined with mental rotation tasks, which require deciding whether a rotated image is the same or the mirror version of an upright image. Recent research with infants shows early discrimination of objects from mirror image versions. However, even at age 4, many children perform near chance level on more standard measures. Similar age discrepancies can be observed in other domains, including perspective taking, theory of mind, and intuitive physics. These paradoxical results raise the questions of how performance relates to competence, and how to conceptualize developmental change.There may be a common underlying mechanism: the development of the ability to imagine things and mentally transform them in a prospective fashion. Keywords: cognitive development, mental rotation, theory of mind, intuitive physics, perspective taking, simulationRunning head: DEVELOPMENT OF MENTAL TRANSFORMATION ABILITIES 3 One of the most impressive skills of the human species is an ability to represent and mentally transform the shapes of objects. People can generate mental images of twodimensional shapes or three-dimensional objects, and can transform them in various ways, e.g., rotating, bending, or folding them [1]. Such flexible representations are vital for making predictions regarding the positions of moving objects, for example to avoid collisions when crossing a street. They also allow for anticipating the effects of actions when manipulating objects or using tools. Furthermore, the ability to perform mental spatial transformations predicts number and math skills [2,3]. Thus, determining the origins and development of mental transformations is a central and topical problem in cognitive science, with translational implications for intervention. However, research on this issue has led to paradoxical findings, with infants showing remarkable abilities but young children failing on seemingly similar tasks. In the present article we put these contrasting results in context with similar findings in other domains, and suggest an underlying mechanism. Age Discrepancies in Mental TransformationMuch of the previous research on mental transformation has focused on a specific kind of spatial transformation, termed mental rotation (MR), which refers to imagining a rotational movement of an object (or array of objects) in 2-or 3-dimensional space. In a classic MR task [4], participants must decide whether a rotated image is the same as a comparison image, or its mirror image. In developmental research, this paradigm has been adapted for the use with children and even infants, with oddly contrasting results. Studies with Preschoolers and Young ChildrenRunning head: DEVELOPMENT OF MENTAL TRANSFORMATION ABILITIES 4 Although Marmor [5,6] found that 4-to 5-year-olds were able to perform MR, there has been controversy about her conclusions [7]. A follow-up study employing the same procedure with different stimuli failed to replicate Marmor's results [8]. Other studie...

show abstract

Section: Box 1 Distinctive Stimulus Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of mental transformation abilities

Frick

Möhring

Newcombe

2014

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, future studies with new paradigms may resolve this issue. A recent paradigm, for example, suggested that the relation between angle disparity and RT can already be demonstrated in 3‐year‐olds (Krüger, Kaiser, Mahler, Bartels, & Krist, ). Such paradigms should be adapted to examine the potential effects of anatomically possible and impossible stimuli on mental rotation in even younger children.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3-year-olds (Kr€ uger, Kaiser, Mahler, Bartels, & Krist, 2014). Such paradigms should be adapted to examine the potential effects of anatomically possible and impossible stimuli on mental rotation in even younger children.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mental rotation and the human body: Children's inflexible use of embodiment mirrors that of adults

Krüger

Ebersbach

2017

British J of Dev Psycho

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adults' mental rotation performance with body-like stimuli is enhanced if these stimuli are anatomically compatible with a human body, but decreased by anatomically incompatible stimuli. In this study, we investigated these effects for kindergartners and first-graders: When asked to mentally rotate cube configurations attached with human body parts in an anatomically compatible way, allowing for the projection of a human body, children performed better than with pure cube combinations. By contrast, when body parts were attached in an anatomically incompatible way, disallowing the projection of a human body, children performed worse than with pure combinations. This experiment is of specific interest against the background of two different theoretical approaches concerning imagery and the motor system in development: One approach assumes an increasing integration of motor processes and imagery over time that enables older children and adults to requisition motor resources for imagery processes, while the other postulates that imagery stems from early sensorimotor processes in the first place, and is disentangled from it over time. The finding that children of the two age groups tested show exactly the same effects as adults when mentally rotating anatomically compatible and incompatible stimuli is interpreted in favour of the latter approach. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? In mental rotation, adults perform better when rotating anatomically possible stimuli as compared to rotating standard cube combinations. Performance is worse when rotating anatomically impossible stimuli. What does this study add? The present study shows that children's mental transformations mirror those of adults in these respects. In case of the anatomically impossible stimuli, this highlights an inflexible use of embodiment in both age groups. This is in line with the Piagetian assumption of imagery being based on sensorimotor processes.

show abstract

“…Further discussion of MR in preschoolers is beyond the scope of this review, but it is notable that no consistent pattern of sex differences in young children's MR has been reported. For example, neither Krüger (2018) nor Krüger et al (2014) observed sex differences in their preschool-aged research participants. However, Levine et al (1999) reported a substantial advantage for male over female 4.5-year-olds on a spatial transformation task, which included both rotation and translation items, and Frick, Hansen, and Newcombe (2013) reported some sex differences as well with 3-year-old participants.…”

Section: Mental Rotation Of 3d Objectsmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Other studies failed to find evidence for MR in children younger than 5 years old, and claimed that the failure to find MR in preschoolers reflects a true lack of ability, as opposed to difficulties with the test (e.g., inability to understand instructions; Frick, Ferrara, & Newcombe, 2013;Quaiser-Pohl, Rohe, & Amberger, 2010). Other studies, however, have demonstrated that even 3-and 4-year-olds provide evidence of MR in simplified tasks (Frick, Hansen, & Newcombe, 2013;Krüger, 2018;Krüger, Kaiser, Mahler, Bartels, & Krist, 2014;Levine, Huttenlocher, Taylor, & Langrock, 1999).…”

Section: Mental Rotation Of 3d Objectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial thinking in infancy: Origins and development of mental rotation between 3 and 10 months of age

Johnson

Moore

2020

Cogn. Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mental rotation (MR) is the ability to transform a mental representation of an object so as to accurately predict how the object would look from a different angle (Sci 171:701-703, 1971), and it is involved in a number of important cognitive and behavioral activities. In this review we discuss recent studies that have examined MR in infants and the development of MR across the first year after birth. These studies have produced many conflicting results, yet several tentative conclusions can be reached. First, MR may be operational in infants as young as 3 months of age. Second, there may be sex differences in MR performance in infancy, in general favoring males, as there are in children and in adults. Third, there appear to be multiple influences on infants' MR performance, including infants' motor activity, stimulus or task complexity, hormones, and parental attitudes. We conclude by calling for additional research to examine more carefully the causes and consequences of MR abilities early in life.

show abstract

Analogue Mental Transformations in 3-Year-Olds: Introducing a New Mental Rotation Paradigm Suitable for Young Children

Cited by 22 publications

References 33 publications

Development of mental transformation abilities

Development of mental transformation abilities

Mental rotation and the human body: Children's inflexible use of embodiment mirrors that of adults

Spatial thinking in infancy: Origins and development of mental rotation between 3 and 10 months of age

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About