Spatial visualization training using interactive animations
Download
1 / 35

spatial visualization training using interactive animations - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 252 Views
  • Updated On :

Spatial Visualization Training Using Interactive Animations. Cheryl A. Cohen Mary Hegarty University of California, Santa Barbara Department of Psychology June 15, 2008. Research questions.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'spatial visualization training using interactive animations' - Albert_Lan


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Spatial visualization training using interactive animations l.jpg
Spatial Visualization Training Using Interactive Animations

Cheryl A. Cohen

Mary Hegarty

University of California, Santa Barbara

Department of Psychology

June 15, 2008


Research questions l.jpg
Research questions

  • What is the potential for using interactive animation and virtual models to train spatial visualization skill?

  • To what extent will training transfer?


Evidence for mutability of spatial ability l.jpg
Evidence for Mutability of Spatial Ability

Baenninger & Newcombe (1989)

Two meta-analyses examined the contribution of experience to the development of spatial skill:

  • Correlational studies: participation in spatial activities (sports, crafts and other hobbies) is positively related to scores on spatial ability measures

  • Experimental studies: performance on spatial ability tests can be improved through training

    • Pre-postest and practice effect experiments


Spatial visualization l.jpg
Spatial Visualization

Spatial visualization:

the ability to understand, mentally encode and manipulate 3D visuo-spatial forms (Carroll, 1993; Hegarty & Waller, 2005).

Some spatial visualization tasks involve relating 2D to 3D representations, and vice versa. One such task is inferring a cross section, which we define as a 2D slice of a 3D object or form.


Cross sections in science education l.jpg

Cross sections in science education

  • Russell-Gebbett, 1984; 1985

  • Spatial skills needed in biology:

  • ability to abstract sectional shapes of a structure

  • ability to understand spatial relationships of internal parts of a 3D structure seen in sections

  • Suggested how to improve students’ spatial skills:

    • clarify meaning of the term “cross section”

    • use analogies to remember shapes (e.g., this cell is shaped like an hour-glass)

    • use verbal cues to help recognize spatial relationships

    • practice mental rotation


  • Slide6 l.jpg

    In previous research, we found that ability to infer and draw a cross-section of an anatomy-like object is correlated with spatial ability (Cohen, 2005; Cohen & Hegarty, 2007), r =.59**


    Slide7 l.jpg

    Experiment 1: Trained participants using 10 interactive animations.

    Experiment 2: Trained participants using 4 interactive animations.


    Pre post measure l.jpg

    Spatial score = sum of normalized means of interactive animations.

    Vandenberg Mental Rotation Test + Guay Visualization of Views

    Pre-post Measure

    • 30-item multiple choice measure to examine sources of difficulty in inferring cross sectionsSanta Barbara

      Solids Test (SBST)

    • Cronbach’sα=.86

    • SBST performance correlated with spatial score, r =.49**


    Pre post measure9 l.jpg
    Pre-post Measure interactive animations.

    Dimensions of hypothesized difficulty:

    • Structural complexity (simple, joined or embedded figures)

    • Orientation of cutting plane (orthogonal and oblique)

    Simple

    orthogonal

    Embedded

    oblique

    Joined

    oblique


    Test instructions l.jpg
    Test instructions interactive animations.


    Santa barbara solids test sample problem l.jpg
    Santa Barbara Solids Test: interactive animations.Sample Problem


    Experiment 1 l.jpg
    Experiment 1 interactive animations.

    (SBST)

    (.50 ≤ on pre-test)Pretest/ screening

    Training (10 interactive animations)

    Control (read non-fiction prose)

    Posttest (SBST)


    Experiment 1 trained figures l.jpg
    Experiment 1: Trained Figures interactive animations.


    Slide15 l.jpg

    Drawing Trial interactive animations.


    Slide16 l.jpg

    animation interactive animations.


    Mental imagery l.jpg
    Mental imagery interactive animations.

    Kosslyn (1980); Kosslyn, Brunn, Cave, & Wallach (1984)

    • images can be produced from:

      • recently acquired visual percepts

      • verbal descriptions

      • representations in long-term memory

    • orientation-bound representation

      • images in the short-term visuospatial buffer represent objects as seen from particular points of view

        Manipulating geometric forms and viewing the resulting images should improve participants’ performance by providing them with memories they can use in this task.


    Motor processes mental imagery l.jpg
    Motor processes interactive animations.& mental imagery

    Wiedenbauer & Jansen-Osmann (2008)

    • Participants trained on mental rotation by rotating a joystick and simultaneously viewing images representing these rotations

      • Authors attributed participants’ improved mental rotation performance at posttest to their congruent updating of movement and vision.

        Trained participants received online visual updating of the results of their manipulations of objects.


    Training effects l.jpg
    Training Effects interactive animations.

    • Training effects were specific to trained stimuli and practiced transformations:

      • Kail & Park (1990) accounted for this training effect by reference to instance theory (Logan, 1988)

      • Pani, Chariker, Dawson & Johnson (2005): attributed participants’ performance gains in virtual reality environment to acquisition of spatial intuitions

    • Spatial training generalized to transformations of new objects and new spatial transformations:

      • Wiedenbauer et al., (2008); Leone, Taine, & Droulez (1993); Wallace & Hofelich (1992)

        We investigated if training effects were specific to trained stimuli, or if they generalized to untrained figures.


    Experiment 120 l.jpg
    Experiment 1 interactive animations.

    (SBST)

    (.50 ≤ on pre-test)Pretest/ screening

    Training (10 interactive animations)

    Control (read non-fiction prose)

    Posttest (SBST)


    Experiment 1 predictions l.jpg
    Experiment 1 Predictions interactive animations.

    Experimental > controls on posttest:

    • Across 30 test items

    • 10 Trained items

    • 17 Similar items

    • 3 New items

    • Greater reduction in egocentric errors for trained participants vs. controls


    Slide22 l.jpg

    New problem interactive animations.

    Trained figure

    Similar problem

    (The cross section of the Trained figure does not appear in the cross section of Problem 15.)

    (One shape in cross section of Problem 18

    is the cross section of the Trained figure)


    Slide23 l.jpg

    p interactive animations. < .001

    p = .001

    p < .05


    Slide24 l.jpg

    n.s. interactive animations.

    p<.001


    Experiment 1 discussion l.jpg
    Experiment 1 Discussion interactive animations.

    • Training led to improved ability to identify cross sections of Trained figures

    • Training also led to improved performance on complex figures.

      • trained participants could identify trained cross sections as elements of novel, complex figures.

    • Trained individuals rejected egocentric responses more frequently than controls.


    Experiment 2 l.jpg
    Experiment 2 interactive animations.

    (SBST)

    (.50 ≤ on pre-test)Pretest/ screening

    Training (4 interactive animations)

    Control (read non-fiction prose)

    Posttest (SBST)


    Slide27 l.jpg

    Experiment 2: Trained Figures interactive animations.


    Experiment 2 predictions l.jpg
    Experiment 2 Predictions interactive animations.

    Experimental > controls on posttest:

    • Across all (30) test items

    • 4 Trained items

    • 13 Similar items

    • 13 New items

    • Greater reduction in egocentric errors for trained participants vs. controls


    Slide29 l.jpg

    p interactive animations.<.001

    p<.001

    p<.001


    Slide30 l.jpg

    n.s. interactive animations.

    p<.001


    Experiment 2 discussion l.jpg
    Experiment 2 Discussion interactive animations.

    • Training to improved ability to identify cross sections of Trained figures

    • Training led to improved performance on the Similar figures.

    • Training led to improved performance on New figures

    • Trained individuals rejected egocentric response.

    • Limitation of Experiments 1 & 2:

      • Multiple choice format allows for process of elimination

        strategies

      • Did not train on all possible views represented in test


    General discussion l.jpg
    General Discussion interactive animations.

    • More evidence for mutability of spatial visualization

    • Interactive animation using virtual geometric figures is an effective mode of training spatial visualization (inferring cross-sections)

    • Trained participants:

      • Transferred learning on Trained shapes to a novel, more complex context Similar problems

      • Transferred Trained shapes to New problems

        How did transfer occur?....


    General discussion33 l.jpg
    General Discussion interactive animations.

    Possible mechanisms of transfer to New figures:

    • Learned Trained cross sections (instance theory)

    • Inferred New cross sections by:

      • noting similar features among test figures & combining features of their cross sections

      • process of elimination strategies


    Implications future directions l.jpg
    Implications & interactive animations.Future Directions

    • Insight into cognitive processes related to transfer of spatial learning

      • Instance theory

      • Comparison and inference

      • Process of elimination

    • Applications in science education

      • Adapt training to specific domains of science education

      • Level the playing field


    Thanks to l.jpg
    Thanks to: interactive animations.

    Mary Hegarty

    Jack Loomis

    Rich Mayer

    Russ Revlin

    Jerry Tietz

    University of California, Santa Barbara

    Department of Psychology


    ad