2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2017.02.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The impact of object type on the spatial analogies in Korean preschoolers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
5
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Consistent with other experimental studies (e.g., Loewenstein & Gentner, 2005), the effects of the spatial language on children’s performance were most evident when the task was challenging. In contrast, for items at lower angles of rotation, children’s use of spatial language, and not the experimenter spatial language, accounted for a significant amount of the variance in performance, consistent with the many studies linking children’s spatial vocabulary to their spatial performance (Ankowski et al, 2012; Balcomb et al, 2011; Gentner et al, 2013; Hermer-Vazquez et al, 1999; Miller et al, 2017; Park & Casasola, 2017; Piccardi et al, 2015; Pruden et al, 2011; Sims & Gentner, 2008). This pattern of results is intriguing and suggests that child spatial language during the play activities related to mental rotation performance in distinct and perhaps complementary ways than the experimenter spatial language.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 74%
“…Consistent with other experimental studies (e.g., Loewenstein & Gentner, 2005), the effects of the spatial language on children’s performance were most evident when the task was challenging. In contrast, for items at lower angles of rotation, children’s use of spatial language, and not the experimenter spatial language, accounted for a significant amount of the variance in performance, consistent with the many studies linking children’s spatial vocabulary to their spatial performance (Ankowski et al, 2012; Balcomb et al, 2011; Gentner et al, 2013; Hermer-Vazquez et al, 1999; Miller et al, 2017; Park & Casasola, 2017; Piccardi et al, 2015; Pruden et al, 2011; Sims & Gentner, 2008). This pattern of results is intriguing and suggests that child spatial language during the play activities related to mental rotation performance in distinct and perhaps complementary ways than the experimenter spatial language.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 74%
“…This spatial vocabulary assessment (Bower et al, 2020) was given to assess children’s knowledge of spatial relations, such as above, behind, and middle (Park & Casasola’s, 2017). The experimenter asked the child to point to the one photograph out of three options that matched a spatial configuration (e.g., “the bear is under the bucket”).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the current study, a new measure of spatial language comprehension, adapted from Park and Casasola (2017), was developed. It makes minimal demands on 3-year-olds with the use of familiar objects (a teddy bear and a bucket) placed in different spatial relations.…”
Section: Current Studymentioning
confidence: 99%