Map use and the Development of Spatial Cognition

Davies, Clare; Uttal, David H.

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195189223.003.0010

Cited by 32 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent studies have shown that, at least under some circumstances, children can form integrated survey-like representations of spaces (Davies & Uttal, 2007; Spelke, Gilmore, & McCarthy, 2011; Uttal, Fisher, et al, 2006; Uttal & Wellman, 1989). If children know the relations but it is not apparent to them how to communicate this information, we may see important changes in their communication if we encourage gesture as a tool for conveying relations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning what children know about space from looking at their hands: The added value of gesture in spatial communication

Sauter

Uttal

Alman

et al. 2012

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines two issues: the role of gesture in the communication of spatial information and the relation between communication and mental representation. Children (8–10 years) and adults walked through a space to learn the locations of six hidden toy animals and then explained the space to another person. In Study 1, older children and adults typically gestured when describing the space and rarely provided spatial information in speech without also providing the information in gesture. However, few 8-year-olds communicated spatial information in speech or gesture. Studies 2 and 3 showed that 8-year-olds did understand the spatial arrangement of the animals and could communicate spatial information if prompted to use their hands. Taken together, these results indicate that gesture is important for conveying spatial relations at all ages and, as such, provides us with a more complete picture of what children do and do not know about communicating spatial relations.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning what children know about space from looking at their hands: The added value of gesture in spatial communication

Sauter

Uttal

Alman

et al. 2012

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous research (e.g., Uttal 2000; Davies and Uttal 2006) argued that using spatial representations can promote the development of spatial cognition. In a study by Uttal and Wellman (1989), one group learned a spatial layout of a playhouse using a map, while a second group used flashcards.…”

Section: Spatial Tool Usementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Source: Kim (2011, 107-108) mentioned above, spatial concept use and spatial tool use were added to the list because prior studies indicated they are important components of spatial thinking (Davies and Uttal 2006;Kastens and Ishikawa 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of a GIS Course on Self-Assessment of Spatial Habits of Mind (SHOM)

Kim

Bednarz

2013

Journal of Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study identified five subdimensions of spatial habits of mind-pattern recognition, spatial description, visualization, spatial concept use, and spatial tool use-and created an inventory to measure them. In addition, the effects of GIS learning on spatial habits of mind were investigated. Preand post-tests were conducted at the beginning and end of a semester-long GIS course. The results suggest that the inventory is a reliable and valid instrument for measuring spatial habits of mind. Analysis of student responses revealed that completion of a GIS course enhanced their spatial habits of mind. It is believed that this research is relevant to a wide range of disciplines whose practitioners are interested in spatial literacy.

show abstract

“…As some participants were more familiar with standard cartographic maps than others, this may have influenced the perspective and representational choices that they made in mapping [59]. Participants more familiar with such maps through education may have been reproducing them, while participants with less exposure may not have been influenced in this way.…”

Section: Use Of Perspective Scale and Abstraction On Sketch Mapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What’s (Not) on the Map: Landscape Features from Participatory Sketch Mapping Differ from Local Categories Used in Language

Wartmann

Purves

2017

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Participatory mapping of local land use as the basis for planning and decision-making has become widespread around the globe. However, still relatively little is known about the conceptual underpinnings of geographic information produced through participatory mapping in given cultural and linguistic settings. In this paper, we therefore address the seemingly simple question of what is (not) represented on maps through an exploratory case study comparing land use categories participants represented on sketch maps with categories elicited through more language-focused ethnographic fieldwork. To explore landscape categorization, we conducted sketch mapping with 29 participants and in-depth ethnographic fieldwork with 19 participants from the Takana indigenous people in the Bolivian Amazon. Sketch mapping resulted in 74 different feature types, while we elicited 156 landscape categories used in language, of which only 23 overlapped with feature types from the sketch mapping. Vegetation categories were highly diversified in language but seldom represented on maps, while more obviously anthropogenic features were represented on sketch maps. Furthermore, participants seldom drew culturally important landscape categories such as fallow plots or important plant harvesting sites on maps, with important potential consequences for natural resource management.

show abstract

Map use and the Development of Spatial Cognition

Cited by 32 publications

References 0 publications

Learning what children know about space from looking at their hands: The added value of gesture in spatial communication

Learning what children know about space from looking at their hands: The added value of gesture in spatial communication

Effects of a GIS Course on Self-Assessment of Spatial Habits of Mind (SHOM)

What’s (Not) on the Map: Landscape Features from Participatory Sketch Mapping Differ from Local Categories Used in Language

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About