2010
DOI: 10.3758/pbr.17.1.29
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Trade-off in object versus spatial visualization abilities: Restriction in the development of visual-processing resources

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

10
75
1
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 86 publications
(88 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
10
75
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The results suggest that specific cognitive abilities play significant roles in predicting the visualizer-verbalizer dimension of cognitive style, supporting previous findings (Kozhevnikov et al, 2005;Kozhevnikov et al, 2010). Specific cognitive abilities, such as spatial abilities and vocabulary, may predispose individuals to specific interests that bias them towards developing a particular cognitive style.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 76%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The results suggest that specific cognitive abilities play significant roles in predicting the visualizer-verbalizer dimension of cognitive style, supporting previous findings (Kozhevnikov et al, 2005;Kozhevnikov et al, 2010). Specific cognitive abilities, such as spatial abilities and vocabulary, may predispose individuals to specific interests that bias them towards developing a particular cognitive style.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…It should be noted, however, that these results, for the most part, are based on undergraduate students enrolled in psychology classes and a large variation of cognitive styles. In contrast, individuals educated and working in specialized professional fields, such as visual arts, sciences and humanities, have been found to vary systematically in cognitive styles based on differing strengths in specific cognitive abilities, though very little is known about their corresponding learning preferences (Kozhevnikov, Blazhenkova, & Becker, 2010).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Il rapporto tra stile cognitivo visualizzatore-verbalizzatore e le prestazioni in compiti cognitivi è stato confermato in alcuni studi (Mayer & Massa, 2003;Thomas & McKay, 2010), ma non in altri (Massa & Mayer, 2006;Kollöffel, 2012). La distinzione tra una preferenza per la visualizzazione degli oggetti e la visualizzazione spaziale sembra produrre risultati più consistenti (Blazhenkova & Kozhevnikov, 2009;Kozhevnikov et al, 2010): gli individui con una preferenza spaziale hanno prestazioni migliori in compiti spaziali come il MRT e compiti ambientali spaziali (come ad esempio la costruzione di mappe: Pazzaglia & Moè, 2013), mentre quelle con una preferenza verbale o per la visualizzazione di un oggetto eseguono meglio, rispettivamente, compiti verbali e visivi (Blazhenkova & Kozhevnikov, 2009). Nel complesso questi studi indicano che lo stile visivo (basato sull'oggetto e spaziale) e lo stile cognitivo verbale possono influenzare l'approccio di un individuo al compito che viene presentato.…”
Section: Stili Personali Nell ' Immaginazione Mentaleunclassified
“…While incompletely understood, this distinction refers respectively to a more holistic encoding of the visual or"depictive"appearance of imaged entities, versus more explicit representation of the relative spatial positions of objects or object parts (Hegarty, 2010). It is claimed that individuals tend to be either object visualizers, favoring a more visual style of imagery that is associated with vivid high resolution imagery and superior performance on visual memory tasks, or spatial visualizers, favoring good spatial analysis and dynamic image transformations such as mental rotation (Kozhevnikov et al, 2005(Kozhevnikov et al, , 2010Blajenkova et al, 2006). A distinction between object visualizers, spatial visualizers, and verbalizers is also claimed in in the development of cognitive styles among 8-to 17-year olds (Blazhenkova et al, 2011).…”
Section: Individual Differences In Spatial Forms Reflect Separable Sumentioning
confidence: 99%