Content uploaded by Juan Cristobal Castro-Alonso
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Juan Cristobal Castro-Alonso on Aug 05, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
53© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019
J. C. Castro-Alonso (ed.), Visuospatial Processing for Education in Health and
Natural Sciences, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20969-8_3
Chapter 3
Science Education andVisuospatial
Processing
JuanC.Castro-Alonso andDavidH.Uttal
Success in the disciplines of health and natural sciences requires many different
cognitive abilities, including verbal, social, mathematical, and visuospatial abilities
(cf. Halpern etal. 2007). The focus of this chapter is on the importance of visuospa-
tial abilities in learning and thriving in science (see Wai etal. 2009; see also Khine
2017; Stieff and Uttal 2015).
There are two critical reasons why visuospatial processing is required to succeed
in health and natural sciences. The rst is that science phenomena are typically
described and explained with visuospatial representations. For example, Mathewson
(1999) reported core visuospatial representations that are shared among diverse sci-
entic disciplines to explain phenomena of their concern (see also Mathewson
2005). The visuospatial representation of a boundary, for example, is employed in
different scientic disciplines. In the discipline of botany, a boundary is shown to
describe and explain a chloroplast membrane; in oceanography, it depicts the ocean
surface. Four of these visuospatial representations shared by the sciences are shown
in Fig.3.1. A more detailed description of these and other representations from dif-
ferent health and natural sciences is given in Table3.1.
The second reason why visuospatial processing is a requirement for science is
that communication among science professionals often depends on visual and spa-
tial information. Examples of these communicative tools are (see Mathewson 1999,
2005):
• data display: chart, graph, map, table, scale;
• data manipulation: comparison, conversion, distortion, extrapolation;
• ordering: category, hierarchy, timeline;
J. C. Castro-Alonso (*)
Center for Advanced Research in Education, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile
e-mail: jccastro@ciae.uchile.cl
D. H. Uttal
School of Education and Social Policy, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA
54
• perceptual extension: magnication, scanning, time-lapse; and
• sign: code, icon, index, symbol.
In short, visuospatial processing is key for achievement in health and natural sci-
ences. The main goal of this chapter is to show that importance. In the rst sections
of this chapter we provide evidence of two directions of effects between visuospa-
tial processing and science education (see also Castro-Alonso and Uttal 2019): (a)
visuospatial processing is an aid to learn science topics (Sect. 3.1), and (b) becom-
ing more knowledgeable in science topics can help performance on visuospatial
tasks (Sect. 3.2). In Sect. 3.3, we describe the potential of visuospatial training as a
likely strategy to enhance learning and succeeding in the science disciplines. We
end the chapter by discussing instructional implications and future directions for
this reciprocal link between visuospatial processing and science performance.
Fig. 3.1 Four core scientic visuospatial representations and examples of how they are instanti-
ated in diverse science disciplines. The representations are (a) branching, (b) coil, (c) cycle, and
(d) unit
J. C. Castro-Alonso and D. H. Uttal
55
Table 3.1 Common
visuospatial representations
and examples of how they are
instantiated in different
science disciplines
Common
representation Science discipline Example
Boundary Botany Chloroplast
membrane
Meteorology,
oceanography
Ocean surface
Branching Meteorology Lightning
Botany,
microbiology,
zoology
Phylogenetic tree
Coil Biology, genetics DNA strand
Biochemistry,
genetics
Protein alpha helix
Circuit Anatomy, physiology,
zoology
Circulatory system
Electrochemistry,
physics
Electrical battery
Cycle Biochemistry,
physiology
Citric acid cycle
Biology, botany,
zoology
Diplontic life cycle
Ecology, meteorology Water cycle
Gradient Cellular biology,
neurology
Membrane
potential
Group Ecology Population
Path Astronomy Planetary orbit
Oceanography Tidal current
Structure Anatomy, zoology Body plan
Unit Biology, cellular
biology
Cell
Bioengineering,
genetics
Codon
Chemistry Molecule
3.1 Visuospatial Processing Inuencing Science Learning
andAchievement
Results from different tests illustrate the importance of visuospatial processing in
learning and succeeding in health and natural sciences. Details of most of the visuo-
spatial tests described in this chapter can be found in Castro-Alonso and Atit (this
volume, Chap. 2), and also in Castro-Alonso etal. (this volume-a, Chap. 8) and
Castro-Alonso etal. (2018a).
3 Science Education andVisuospatial Processing
56
The usual nding is that visuospatial processing is less inuential in the advanced
stages of science prociency (see Uttal and Cohen 2012; see also Langlois etal.
2015; Stieff etal. 2018). In other words, the expertise acquired later in training is
more relevant than visuospatial processing to thrive in the science elds. This means
that when students do not have the necessary scientic knowledge, they rely more
on visuospatial abilities to succeed in their disciplines. Later, they reach a point in
which science expertise is more inuential. In the next subsections, we provide
examples of the importance of visuospatial processing in novice university students
of diverse science areas (see summary in Table3.2).
3.1.1 Anatomy andMedicine
Several correlational studies have investigated the effects of different visuospatial
abilities on academic achievement in anatomy. An example of the ability of mental
rotation in three-dimensions (3D) is provided by Garg etal. (2001), who investi-
gated 146 university participants (50% females) studying the bones of the human
hand through a computer visualization model. Findings showed that the scores in a
3D mental rotation instruments (the Mental Rotations Test) were signicant predic-
tors of success in the hand bones examination. Similarly, Luer etal. (2012) used
the Mental Rotations Test on 352 rst-year medicine undergraduates. Students in
the top 25% of Mental Rotations Test scores surpassed those in the bottom 25%, in
both practical and written examinations of a gross anatomy course. Last, Loftus
Table 3.2 Examples of science areas and learning topics where different visuospatial abilities
have been effective
Science area Learning topic Visuospatial ability
Anatomy Hand bones 3D mental rotation
Anatomy Gross anatomy 3D mental rotation
Medicine Respiratory system 2D mental rotation and mental folding
Medicine Autonomic nervous
system
Field independence
Surgery Laparoscopic skills 3D mental rotation and eld independence
Surgery Surgical skills Mental folding
Biology Classication of plants Mental rotation and eld independence
Biology Functioning of an
enzyme
2D mental rotation and mental folding
Chemistry Organic chemistry
molecules
3D mental rotation
Chemistry General chemistry 3D mental rotation and eld independence
Physics Pulley systems 3D mental rotation and mental folding
Astronomy Planetary orbits Mental folding
Geology Structure of a mountain
area
3D mental rotation, mental folding, dual tasks of
working memory
Meteorology El Niño phenomenon Mental folding
J. C. Castro-Alonso and D. H. Uttal
57
etal. (2017) also employed the scores of the Mental Rotations Test, in this case, to
perform a median split of their sample of 29 adult participants (35% females).
Students with higher 3D mental rotation outperformed their lower-scoring counter-
parts in solving thorax and ankle anatomy tests that involved mental rotations,
cross-sections, and intersecting planes.
In addition to 3D mental rotation and anatomy, other visuospatial abilities have
been inuential to learn other health science topics. For example, Fiorella and
Mayer (2017) reported two studies with a total of 202 undergraduates (64% females)
learning about the respiratory system from text-only passages. Combining the
scores of a 3D mental rotation test and a mental folding instrument, the authors
calculated a composite score of spatial ability. This measure of spatial ability was a
signicant predictor of learning about the respiratory system, as measured in reten-
tion, transfer, and drawing of facts and concepts. Mayer and Sims (1994, Experiment
2) used a two-dimensional (2D) test of mental rotation and a test of mental folding
in a study with 97 university participants. With the data of both instruments, an
aggregated spatial ability score was calculated. The participants studied a multime-
dia presentation of the respiratory system, where a short animation and concurrent
narration explained processes such as inhaling and exhaling. Results revealed that
high spatial ability students outperformed low spatial participants. Also, in two
experiments totaling 68 psychology undergraduates, Wiegmann et al. (1992)
observed small to medium correlations (values from r= .24 to r= .32) between
scores on a eld independence test (the Group Embedded Figures Test) and scores
on learning tests about the autonomic nervous system.
3.1.2 Surgery
Mental rotation in 3D has also been related to surgery tasks. For example, Wanzel
etal. (2002) observed signicant correlations in 37 surgical residents between the
Mental Rotations Test and complex surgical skills. Keehner etal. (2006) investigated
44 non-medicine university students training laparoscopic surgical skills through a
virtual reality system. Results revealed that, for both the beginning and ending train-
ing sessions, 3D mental rotation scores were correlated with performance in these
laparoscopic tasks. Similarly, Risucci etal. (2001) investigated 94 surgeons partici-
pating in a basic laparoscopic skills course. Findings showed that 3D mental rotation
and eld independence were correlated to speed for doing the surgery drills.
Also concerning eld independence is the study by Gibbons etal. (1986), where
58 general surgery residents showed large correlations (r=.55 and r=.60) between
technical surgical skills and scores in the Hidden Figures Test, a eld independence
measure. Keehner etal. (2004) investigated the relationship between surgical and
mental folding abilities of 93 surgeons (10% females). Results showed a signicant
correlation between these abilities (r=.39), but only for the novice surgeons. More
experienced professionals did not show this relationship (r = .02), echoing that
visuospatial processing is most important in the novice stages of scientic
competence.
3 Science Education andVisuospatial Processing
58
3.1.3 Biology
Mental rotation and other visuospatial abilities have also been inuential in learning
biology contents. For example, Bartholomé and Bromme (2009) described a corre-
lational study of 84 university participants (77% females) learning botany from
multimedia modules. Spatial ability was measured by combining mental rotation
and eld independence scores. This aggregated spatial ability score was signi-
cantly correlated with different multimedia learning achievements, including the
classication of parts of plants (r = .42, p < .01) and of whole plants (r = .45,
p<.01). In Seufert etal. (2009, Experiment 2), 78 education and psychology uni-
versity participants (74% females) studied multimedia material about the structure
and function of the enzyme ATP-Synthase. Mental rotation in 2D was measured
with half of the Card Rotations Test, and mental folding was assessed with half of
the Paper Folding Test. The mean of both tests scores was used as their aggregated
spatial ability score. Results in the comprehension and transfer tests showed that the
composite spatial ability was a signicant predictor for learning.
In an experimental approach,Lord (1990) employed three spatial ability tests
with the Ekstrom etal. (1976) battery to measure 250 university students in a biol-
ogy class. Students in the lowest third of these spatial abilities were allocated to
control and treatment groups for the rest of the year. The training involved weekly
spatial tasks requiring imagining slices of 3D objects that led to 2D shapes. At the
end of the class, the students were assessed in a written nal exam with items about
the interpretation of charts, graphs, and diagrams, and a nal laboratory exam
involving macroscopic and microscopic biology. Results revealed that participants
in the spatial training group outperformed those in the control group in these bio-
logical tasks.
3.1.4 Chemistry
In two experiments with university students, Barrett and Hegarty (2016) assessed the
role of 3D mental rotation in the manipulation of virtual organic chemistry mole-
cules. In Experiment 1, 125 students (51% females) aligned 3D molecules to 2D
diagrams, whereas in Experiment 2, 142 participants (51% females) aligned two 3D
models. In both experiments, individuals with higher scores in the Mental Rotations
Tests outperformed students scoring low mental rotations in these virtual chemistry
tasks. Similarly, Stull and Hegarty (2016) reported two experiments with under-
graduate chemistry participants attempting translations of chemical representations,
where 3D mental rotation was measured using an online Mental Rotations Test. Both
Experiment 1 (105 students, 54% females) and Experiment 2 (104 students, 65%
females) showed that 3D mental rotation was a signicant predictor of task achieve-
ment, although this spatial ability effect was reduced when the tasks were executed
using manipulative models (see also Castro-Alonso etal. this volume-c, Chap. 7).
J. C. Castro-Alonso and D. H. Uttal
59
Carter etal. (1987) used two different visuospatial tests in science and engineer-
ing undergraduates: (a) the Purdue Visualization of Rotations, a 3D mental rotation
test; and (b) the Find A Shape Puzzle, a eld independence test. With the data from
both measures, the authors divided the sample in three (high, medium, and low
spatial ability students) and compared the performance of these groups in multiple-
choice chemistry exams. Globally, high spatial ability students outperformed low
spatial students in the written exams, which covered different chemistry topics (e.g.,
molecular geometry, atomic structure, gas laws, and stoichiometry). Pribyl and
Bodner (1987) employed the same two tests to measure 3D mental rotation and eld
independence in university students of four organic chemistry courses. The authors
combined the two tests scores, and then compared chemistry exam performance
between “low spatial students” (who scored ≤0.5 standard deviations from the
mean) and “high spatial students” (scoring ≥0.5 standard deviations from the mean).
High spatial students outperformed low spatial students. This spatial ability effect
was observed in exam items that required the mental manipulation of 2D molecules
and to solve other general chemistry problems, but was not present when the ques-
tions could be answered by rote memory.
3.1.5 Physics andAstronomy
For physics topics, we highlight research employing the Paper Folding Test, a mea-
sure of mental folding. For example, in three experiments with university students,
Hegarty and Sims (1994) investigated the effects of 3D mental rotation (the Mental
Rotations Test) and mental folding (the Paper Folding Test) on mental animation
performance (inference of movements) from static images of pulley systems.
Results showed that high visuospatial processing students outperformed the lower
visuospatial achievers in these mechanical tasks. Similar ndings were reported by
Schweppe etal. (2015) in two experiments with a total of 253 undergraduates (75%
females), where a computer shortened version of the Paper Folding Test was used.
Findings revealed that the scores in mental folding were positively correlated with
retention and comprehension of the structure and functioning of pulley systems
shown in multimedia presentations.
Kozhevnikov etal. (2007, Study 3) investigated 15 university students solving
kinematics problems about the motion of objects shown in graphs. Using the results
of the rst half of the Paper Folding Test, students were classied as low or high in
mental folding. Students who scored highly on the mental folding test could solve
motion graph tasks better than students who scored poorly on the folding test. As the
eye-tracking analysis showed, this difference was partially explained by the fact that
students who scored well on the mental folding test could better integrate the infor-
mation in both graphical axes.
Kühl etal. (2018) found similar results in astronomy, in an experiment with 198
university students (76% females) asked to learn about planets orbiting the sun.
3 Science Education andVisuospatial Processing
60
When the topic was shown as a static depiction, students with higher results on the
Paper Folding Test outperformed the lower visuospatial processing peers (see also
Castro-Alonso etal. this volume-b, Chap. 5).
3.1.6 Geology andMeteorology
Piburn etal. (2005) investigated 103 geology university participants (53% females)
studying topographic maps. Mental folding (measured with an adapted Surface
Development Test) was a signicant predictor of learning, but 3D mental rotation
(modied Cubes Rotation Test) was not. Hambrick etal. (2012) studied the perfor-
mance of 67 adult participants (46% females) in inferring the structure of a moun-
tainous area. Participants took six tests of visuospatial processing (including 3D
mental rotation, mental folding, and dual tasks of working memory), from which a
composite score was calculated. For geology novices, visuospatial processing was a
signicant predictor of performance in the task. However, in yet another example of
the scientic expertise factor, the effect of visuospatial processing was not signi-
cant among geology experts and advanced students.
The common Paper Folding Test has also been employed in research about mete-
orology topics. Jaeger etal. (2016) reported two experiments with university par-
ticipants studying text-only passages describing the Pacic Ocean weather
phenomenon of El Niño. Experiment 1 investigated 72 participants (62% females)
and used the whole Paper Folding Test, whereas Experiment 2 investigated 72 stu-
dents (66% females) and used half of the test. Both experiments showed that the
mental folding scores predicted comprehension, employing different learning mea-
sures. Last, in an experiment with 84 adults (69% females) studying booklets about
the formation of lightning, Eitel etal. (2019) compared seductive to non-seductive
designs (see also Castro-Alonso et al. this volume-b, Chap. 5). Mental folding
scores were signicantly correlated with performance scores of recall (r = .26,
p=.02) and transfer (r=.42, p<.001). In other words, mental folding ability sup-
ported the learning of this meteorology topic, independent of the booklet design.
In short, studies with different visuospatial processing tests and diverse elds of
health and natural sciences show that visuospatial abilities are key assets to thrive in
science education and practice. Although much of the evidence is correlational,
there are also someexperimental ndings that have shown these benecial effects
of visuospatial processing on science learning and achievement.
3.2 Science Education Inuencing Visuospatial Processing
As noted above, the relation between science education and visuospatial processing
is reciprocal. Thus far we have considered how visuospatial processing supports
learning about health and natural sciences. Now we consider the other side of the
J. C. Castro-Alonso and D. H. Uttal
61
relation: How does learning about health and natural sciences inuence different
visuospatial abilities.
Although this side of the relation has received less attention, there are several
examples of correlations between enrollment in health and natural sciences and
performance on visuospatial processing. For example, Peters etal. (1995) compared
scores on the Mental Rotations Test between 312 students (43% females) in science
areas (engineering, biology, and physics) and 324 students (69% females) in arts,
social sciences, and humanities. The science students outperformed the participants
from the other areas in the visuospatial task. Employing a larger sample of univer-
sity students (N>2000), Peters etal. (2006) reported signicantly higher scores on
the Mental Rotations Test in science students than in social science participants.
These studies are only correlational, and thus the direction of causality cannot be
assessed. However, there is also experimental evidence that indicates that learning
health or natural science can improve visuospatial reasoning (see Table3.3).
As Table3.3 shows, generally, these studies have been conducted on a single
science discipline. For example, a recent meta-analysis by Langlois etal. (2019)
showed that anatomy education provided an effective training for visuospatial pro-
cessing, notably mental rotation. The following subsections describe additional
experimental evidence for different science disciplines.
3.2.1 Anatomy andDentistry
The study by Luer etal. (2012), described in Sect. 3.1.1, measured the perfor-
mance of 255 rst-year medical students on the Mental Rotations Test. The study
compared 3D mental rotation scores before and after a one-semester gross anatomy
course. The class required dissections of cadavers and the study of 2D anatomical
pictures from textbooks. The mental rotation scores of students of both genders
increased signicantly by the end of the semester.
Table 3.3 Examples of visuospatial abilities that have been enhanced by different science learning
experiences
Science area Visuospatial ability Learning experience
Anatomy 3D mental rotation Gross anatomy
Anatomy 3D mental rotation Virtual anatomy
Dentistry Cross sections on 3D shapes Dental expertise
Biology 2D mental rotation and mental folding Biology classes
Biology Field independence Microbiology
Veterinary 3D mental rotation Canine anatomy
Chemistry 3D mental rotation Chemistry expertise
Physics Mental rotation, mental folding, eld
independence
Physics classes and labs
Geology 3D mental rotation Geology expertise
3 Science Education andVisuospatial Processing
62
Similarly, Vorstenbosch etal. (2013) reported ndings with rst-year university
students of medicine (experimental group, n= 242, 67% females) and rst-year
students of education (control group, n=258, 95% females) attempting the Mental
Rotations Test. The treatment given to the students of medicine consisted of 160h
(4 weeks) of study of the gross anatomy of the thorax, abdomen, and pelvis.
Instruction utilized visualizations and cross-sections. For the control group of edu-
cation students, a course lasting 4weeks presented topics of social science research
methods. Medical students learning from the anatomy materials improved more on
the Mental Rotations Test than the education participants learning about research
methods. The treatment showed an effect size of d=0.12. According to the bench-
marks by Cohen (1988), this value represents a small-sized effect.
Recently, Guimarães etal. (2019) investigated 611 medicine university students
(65% females) training with three different regimes of virtual anatomy: cardiovas-
cular, musculoskeletal, and cardiovascular plus musculoskeletal. Scores in the
Mental Rotations Test were higher after all the types of anatomy training, compared
to the scores before the treatments. The effect size was large (d=1.57) for the three
training regimes. However, as the authors acknowledged, the study included the
limitation of not including a control group. Hence, these results should be inter-
preted with caution (see also Sect. 3.3.4, below).
Hegarty etal. (2009) investigated the spatial skills of novice and more advanced
dentistry students. Two of the spatial tests were novel and involved performing men-
tal horizontal or vertical cross sections on 3D objects, a skill useful for professional
dentists. The only signicant difference between the two groups of different exper-
tise was observed in the test of cross sections from 3D teeth. There were no differ-
ences in cross sections from abstract 3D objects or in the more general mental
rotation tests. These ndings suggest that dentistry training facilitates the develop-
ment of specic visuospatial skills relevant to the profession but does not help per-
formance in more general visuospatial tasks. In other words, this training did not
produce transfer to related tasks (see below, Sect. 3.3).
3.2.2 Biology andVeterinary Medicine
For biology education, we describe two examples, involving correlational and
quasi-experimental designs. The correlational evidence is provided by Macnab and
Johnstone (1990), who measured spatial skills in participants of different ages,
ranging from primary school children to the postgraduate levels. Three different
visuospatial skills were measured, which in order of difculty were: (a) the ability
to use different 2D sections to mentally construct a 3D object; (b) mental rotations
with 2D gures; and (c) the ability to imagine a 2D slice taken from a cut surface of
a 3D object. Results showed that these visuospatial skills tended to be higher in the
students who had taken biology classes, compared to participants lacking this area
of studies.
J. C. Castro-Alonso and D. H. Uttal
63
Concerning the quasi-experiment, Lennon (2000) investigated 59 microbiology
undergraduates performing a 20min weekly training of visuospatial activities with
clay bacteria models. After this regime of 10 weeks, the experimental group
improved on a eld independence instrument (the Hidden Figures Test), but not on
the other two spatial abilities measured, namely 3D mental rotation (Cube
Comparisons Test) and mental folding (Paper Folding Test).
In the related eld of veterinary medicine, Provo etal. (2002) investigated 128
undergraduates (75% females) learning a canine anatomy course. The course was
effective in improving scores in a test of mental rotation with 3D gures. The
authors suggested that this improvement was to be expected, as the learning activi-
ties involved visualizing cross sections and images of the 3D anatomy of the dog.
Similar results were observed in a study by Gutierrez etal. (2017) with 81 veteri-
nary medicine undergraduates (86% females). The students completed 32weeks of
an integrated veterinary anatomy curriculum, which entailed an average of 57h of
anatomy laboratories. Results showed that this course was effective to improve the
scores in the Mental Rotations Test.
3.2.3 Chemistry, Physics, andGeology
Concerning chemistry knowledge, we provide an example of correlational evidence.
In two studies with 88 and 96 undergraduates (50% females in each), Hausmann
(2014) investigated science (chemistry and engineering) and non-science students
(philosophy and English). Science students outperformed non-science participants
on the Mental Rotation Test. The effects favoring chemistry and engineering areas
were large, both in Experiment 1 (
η
P
2=.28) and Experiment 2 (
η
P
2=.39).
Burnett and Lane (1980) investigated the effects of taking four academic semes-
ters of physics on the mental rotation of 142 university students. The participants in
the elds of humanities and social sciences improved less in mental rotation ability
than did those in the physics and mathematics programs. Likewise, Pallrand and
Seeber (1984) showed that 10weeks of university physics classes and laboratories
could enhance the visuospatial abilities of mental rotation, mental folding, and eld
independence.
Lastly, there is also correlational evidence that studying geology can affect
visuospatial processing. Resnick and Shipley (2013) investigated 37 doctorate pro-
fessionals from three different elds, namely geology (47% females), organic
chemistry (18% females), and English (50% females). Both geologists and chemists
performed signicantly better than the English experts on the Mental Rotations
Test. However, there were no subject-area differences in the test of eld indepen-
dence (Hidden Figures Test) and the dual visuospatial task of working memory
(Symmetry Span Task).
Concluding this section, both the correlational and the stricter experimental evi-
dence support the relation between being more knowledgeable or learning in differ-
ent science areas and scoring high in different visuospatial processing tests.
3 Science Education andVisuospatial Processing
64
3.3 Visuospatial Training
In a recent meta-analysis of 42 effect sizes in twin studies, King et al. (2019)
reported that visuospatial processing was largely heritable. However, the study also
showed that environmental factors played a role, although smaller than the genetic
variables. In other words, although visuospatial processing is inherited as a xed
feature, it is also dependent on the environment, and, thus, it can be trained.
Due to the relation between visuospatial processing and science academic
achievement, researchers are looking for ways to train visuospatial abilities, to
enhance science learning and performance (e.g., Cheng 2017; Stieff and Uttal 2015;
Uttal etal. 2013). Since visuospatial processing develops through childhood, there
is substantial time available for children’s instructors to include activities inside and
outside the classroom to foster visuospatial processing, and eventually boost sci-
ence achievement (see Newcombe and Frick 2010).
However, the link between training in visuospatial activities and increasing sci-
ence performance scores is not always straightforward. In fact, this link involves
two assumptions (see Stieff and Uttal 2015): (a) visuospatial processing can be
trained (see also Baenninger and Newcombe 1989), and thus practicing a visuospa-
tial task allows improvement in that specic task and in very similar ones; and (b)
visuospatial processing can also be transferred, and thus practicing a visuospatial
task allows that its improvement does also affect an untrained scientic task. The
second assumption has been much harder to prove (Stieff and Uttal 2015; see also
Barnett and Ceci 2002).
In a similar demarcation, Wright et al. (2008) distinguish between instance-
based and process-based spatial training. The instance-based perspective predicts
that training specic visuospatial processes will develop only similar processes. In
contrast, process-based training predicts a more general impact, where training can
develop similar and relatively different processes, so, transfer to new visuospatial
and science tasks could occur.
Considering these classications and the literature on working memory and spa-
tial training (e.g., Könen etal. 2016; Melby-Lervåg etal. 2016; Uttal and Cohen
2012), we describe three categories to order visuospatial training, as follows:
1. near transfer: includes mostly training, instance-based, practice, or retest effects.
For example, training in one visuospatial process (e.g., 2D mental rotation)
transfers to that same process or a similar process but with minor differences
(e.g., the same type of 2D mental rotation with new shapes; see Fig.3.2a);
2. intermediate transfer: includes more transfer and certain process-based effects.
For example, training in one visuospatial process (e.g., 2D mental rotation)
transfers to a similar process with some differences (e.g., 3D mental rotation or
mental folding; see Fig.3.2b); and
3. far transfer: includes an even larger degree of transfer and process-based effects.
For example, training in one visuospatial process (e.g., 2D mental rotation)
transfers to a different process with more differences (e.g., visuospatial working
memory tasks or science topics; see Fig.3.2c).
J. C. Castro-Alonso and D. H. Uttal
65
3.3.1 Near Transfer Effects
Uttal etal. (2013) conducted a meta-analysis of 206 studies and 1,038 effect sizes,
in order to investigate training in spatial abilities. The overall effect size favoring
this near transfer was medium-sized (g=0.47), supporting the claim that spatial
ability can be improved with practice.
Individual studies have also shown these near transfer effects. For example, con-
cerning 3D mental rotation, Meneghetti etal. (2017) investigated 72 female univer-
sity students training 35 min weekly (for 5 weeks) on this visuospatial ability.
Accuracy and speed of the mental rotations improved after the training sessions.
Roach et al. (2019) selected 33 science university students (73% females) who
scored poorly on the pen-and-paper Mental Rotations Test. The participants trained
with an electronic version of this test and improved their performance.
Also, both studies promoted other techniques to improve these training effects.
Meneghetti etal. (2017) showed that giving the students an additional rotation strat-
egy led to better training results. Roach etal. (2019) reported a method in which the
participants observed the positions at which experts had looked while solving the
mental rotations. This signaling by experts was more effective than only training
with the instrument.
Fig. 3.2 Three degrees of transfer effects. The example shows 2D mental rotation training show-
ing effects categorized as (a) near, (b) intermediate, and (c) far transfer
3 Science Education andVisuospatial Processing
66
Hoyek etal. (2009) investigated 16 physical education students (38% females)
receiving 240min (12 sessions of 20min each) of mental rotation training. The
training involved mental rotations with familiar and abstract 3D and 2D gures. A
near transfer was revealed when the training produced a signicantly higher perfor-
mance on the Mental Rotation Test, a 3D instrument that had not been practiced.
Kail (1986) reported an effective training of 2D mental rotations with alphanu-
meric characters. Eight adults (50% females) participated in 16 sessions of 240 tri-
als each, totaling 3,840 training trials. At the end of the sessions, participants were
25% faster than before the treatment. Likewise, Goldstein and Chance (1965)
reported that 26 undergraduates (50% females) improved their scores on the
Embedded Figures Test of eld independence after eight blocks of trials.
Spatial working memory can also be trained. Li etal. (2008) investigated the
effects of 15-min training for 45days of two Spatial 2-Back Tasks. For both imme-
diate and delayed (3months later) testing, participants demonstrated near transfer to
other n-back working memory tasks, but not larger transfer effects to dual tasks of
working memory. Similarly, in a study with psychology undergraduates, Chooi and
Thompson (2012) observed that daily training (30min, 4 days a week) in n-back
tasks showed near transfer, but not intermediate transfer to another working mem-
ory task (the dual task known as the Operation Span Task), nor far transfer to mental
rotation or other functions of visuospatial memory.
Also, Redick etal. (2013) and Colom etal. (2013) reported that visuospatial and
auditory stimuli in n-back tasks were effective for training but not for transfer.
Redick and colleagues did not nd an intermediate transfer to two dual tasks of
working memory (the Symmetry Span Task and the Running Letter Span), nor a far
transfer to 15 separate measures of verbal and nonverbal tasks (assessing multitask-
ing, uid and crystallized intelligence, and perceptual speed). Colom etal. did not
observe an intermediate transfer to three dual tasks of working memory, nor far
transfer to the uid intelligence factor.
Similarly, other studies (e.g., Owen etal. 2010; von Bastian and Eschen 2016)
have shown near transfer effects for visuospatial working memory tasks but have
failed to show more transfer to other cognitive and academic tests.
3.3.2 Intermediate Transfer Effects
There is evidence that mental rotation training can lead to intermediate transfer.
Sometimes this transfer is observed in a change of dimensionality between the men-
tal rotation tasks. For example, Moreau (2012) investigated 46 university students
(52% females) receiving videogame training with Tetris-type blocks, in both 3D and
2D versions. Task performance was measured with mental rotation tests that varied
both in stimulus type (human body or polygon) and in dimensionality (3D or 2D).
Training with the 2D block videogame led to near transfer, that is, better perfor-
mance in mental rotations of 2D polygons and 2D bodies. However, training with
J. C. Castro-Alonso and D. H. Uttal
67
the 3D videogame produced an intermediate transfer, leading to better mental rota-
tions of 3D polygons, 3D bodies, 2D polygons, and 2D bodies.
Other forms of spatial training have also shown intermediate transfer. For exam-
ple, Stericker and LeVesconte (1982) trained 45 introductory psychology students
(53% females) on three different tests, which measured 3D mental rotation, mental
folding, and eld independence, respectively. There were six weekly training ses-
sions, each one lasting approximately 20min per test. Training led to improvement
on the three tests as well as on an untrained 2D mental rotation instrument.
Similarly, Lord (1985) divided a sample of 84 undergraduate biology students
into experimental and control conditions. The treatment for the experimental group
included weekly training with abstract spatial tasks that required imagining 2D sur-
faces taken from bisections of 3D objects. At post-test, the experimental group, but
not the control group, showed an intermediate transfer to a mental rotation test and
a mental folding test.
As with spatial abilities, visuospatial working memory tasks can also show inter-
mediate transfer effects to other working memory tests. Although the meta-analysis
of 145 experiments (87 studies) by Melby-Lervåg etal. (2016) revealed a lack of
intermediate and far transfer for general working memory tasks, the effects were
more encouraging when the tests involved visuospatial stimuli. In fact, for visuo-
spatial working memory training, the meta-analysis showed small to medium inter-
mediate effects, both for immediate measures (g=0.28) and delayed post-tests after
months (g=0.40).
The n-back paradigm has been also employed to investigate intermediate transfer
of visuospatial working memory tasks. For example, Soveri etal. (2017) conducted
a meta-analysis of training on different formats of this task. This analysis of 41
experiments (N= 2,105 participants) showed a medium effect size (g= 0.59), in
which training in one format of the N-Back Task showed a near transfer to similar
formats. Although there was intermediate transfer to different visuospatial working
memory tasks, it was small (g=0.18).
Analogously, Minear etal. (2016) trained 31 university students (74% females)
on the Spatial N-Back Task for a total of 20 sessions (20 min each). The training
showed a medium to large near transfer effect (
η
P
2=0.09). It also showed large
intermediate transfer effects to the Object N-Back Task (
η
P
2=0.40), and two dual
tasks of working memory, namely the Symmetry Span (
η
P
2=0.20) and the Rotation
Span (
η
P
2=0.15).
An example of visual working memory producing intermediate transfer is pro-
vided in Adam and Vogel (2018). They investigated 101 adult participants (69%
females) training in a visual working memory task with colored squares. The six
training sessions (1h each) showed training effects on the working memory task,
and intermediate transfer to a different task that used the same colored stimuli.
However, there was no evidence of far transfer to other visual tasks or a uid intel-
ligence measure.
3 Science Education andVisuospatial Processing
68
3.3.3 Far Transfer Effects
The challenge of transferring knowledge or abilities from one area to another less
similar area has interested researchers for a long time (e.g., Thorndike and
Woodworth 1901). However, many current studies and reviews, mostly with work-
ing memory training paradigms (e.g., Gathercole etal. 2019; Sala and Gobet 2017;
Simons etal. 2016), show that far transfer is rarely obtained.
Similarly, the evidence that visuospatial training can lead to far transfer is scarcer
than that supporting near and intermediate transfer (see Gathercole et al. 2019;
Simons etal. 2016; Stieff and Uttal 2015). An experiment by Lord (1990) with uni-
versity students (see Sect. 3.1.3) provides an example of effective far transfer. He
reported that weekly training with tasks of imagining 2D surfaces taken from 3D
objects improved performance in a biology course.
Stephenson and Halpern (2013) reported a study with university students train-
ing 5days a week for 4weeks (for approximately 20min each day). Visuospatial
working memory training showed intermediate transfer that led to higher scores on
the Paper Folding Test of mental folding. They also demonstrated some far transfer,
with two of four tests of uid intelligence improving as a result of the visuospatial
memory training.
Also, Sanchez (2012) compared 60 university students (38% females) randomly
allocated to two different videogame training groups, namely, a visuospatial rst-
person shooter or a verbal word-making condition (see also Castro-Alonso and
Fiorella this volume, Chap. 6). The visuospatial training group outperformed the
verbal condition on the task of writing an essay about volcanic eruptions. In other
words, for this geology task, visuospatial training was more effective than verbal
training.
A summary of these near, intermediate, and transfer effects of visuospatial train-
ing is provided in Table3.4.
3.3.4 Methodological Shortcomings inTraining Studies
Although we showed evidence of transfer from visuospatial training, these effects
were usually in the near or intermediate degrees. In other words, the literature shows
infrequent far transfer that reaches the academic elds of health and natural
sciences.
In addition, many studies that show the transfer of visuospatial abilities and
working memory training to academic outcomes, have methodological shortcom-
ings, as summarized n Table3.5.
A recurring issue reported by different researchers (e.g., Könen et al. 2016;
Melby-Lervåg and Hulme 2013; Redick etal. 2015; Shipstead etal. 2012; Simons
etal. 2016; von Bastian and Oberauer 2014) is the quality of the control groups
employed. In addition, as shown in the meta-analysis by Langlois etal. (2019),
J. C. Castro-Alonso and D. H. Uttal
69
Table 3.4 Examples of visuospatial training regimes showing near (N), intermediate (I), and far
(F) degrees of transfer
Visuospatial training Did transfer to Did not transfer to References
3D mental rotation 3D mental rotation (N) Meneghetti etal.
(2017) and Roach
etal. (2019)
3D and 2D mental
rotation
Novel 3D mental rotation
(N)
Hoyek etal.
(2009)
2D mental rotation 2D mental rotation (N) Kail (1986)
Spatial 2-Back Tasks Novel n-back tasks (N) Dual tasks of working
memory (I)
Li etal. (2008)
N-back tasks Novel n-back tasks (N) Dual tasks of working
memory (I), mental
rotation (F), visuospatial
memory (F)
Chooi and
Thompson (2012)
Visuospatial n-back
tasks
Novel visuospatial n-back
tasks (N)
Dual tasks of working
memory (I), uid
intelligence (F)
Colom etal.
(2013) and Redick
etal. (2013)
2D block mental
rotation videogame
Novel 2D mental
rotations (N)
Novel 3D mental
rotations (I)
Moreau (2012)
3D block mental
rotation videogame
Novel 3D (N)and
novel2D(I) mental
rotations
Moreau (2012)
3D mental rotation,
mental folding, eld
independence
Novel 2D mental rotation
(I)
Stericker and
LeVesconte
(1982)
Imagining 2D
surfaces from 3D
objects
Mental rotation (I),
mental folding (I)
Lord (1985)
N-back task Novel n-back tasks (N),
visuospatial working
memory tasks (I)
Soveri etal.
(2017)
Spatial N-Back Task Spatial N-Back Task (N),
Object N-Back Task (I),
dual tasks of working
memory (I)
Minear etal.
(2016)
Visual working
memory
Visual working memory
and similar tasks (N, I)
Novel visual tasks (F),
uid intelligence (F)
Adam and Vogel
(2018)
Imagining 2D
surfaces from 3D
objects
Biology course (F) Lord (1990)
Visuospatial working
memory
Mental folding (I), uid
intelligence (F)
Fluid intelligence (F) Stephenson and
Halpern (2013)
First-person shooter
videogame
Volcanic eruption essay
(F)
Sanchez (2012)
3 Science Education andVisuospatial Processing
70
studies sometimes do not include any control group. Of course, studies without
proper controls cannot unambiguously demonstrate training effects, as the
improvement could be due to many different confounds (cf. about confounding
variables for multimedia design in Castro-Alonso etal. 2016).
As agreed by many authors (e.g., Melby-Lervåg and Hulme 2013; Redick etal.
2015; Simons etal. 2016), the gold standard for a control group is an active control,
which performs cognitive and engaging activities like the treatment group. In con-
trast, a passive control performs non-equivalent actions and sometimes no activity
at all. The problem of using passive controls is that they are usually much less
engaged than active controls, so they could articially inate the treatment effect.
Consider the following example with an n-back training paradigm. The meta-
analysis of 20 studies by Au etal. (2015) reported a small but signicant effect
(g=0.24) of n-back training on far transfer to uid intelligence. However, a Bayesian
reanalysis by Dougherty etal. (2016), which considered the effects of passive ver-
sus active controls separately, revealed that the far transfer was only present with
passive controls. In other words, the studies that used a design including active
controls did not show the far transfer effects of n-back training.
In addition to the control group problem, two other issues, regarded as severe by
Simons etal. (2016), are: (a) failing to assign the participants randomly to the treat-
ment and control conditions, and (b) failing to assess all conditions at pretest (see
also discussion in Melby-Lervåg and Hulme 2013; Redick etal. 2015). These prob-
lems can produce effects that might be attributed to the visuospatial treatment when
in fact they could correspond to individual differences between the treatment and
control groups.
A less problematic issue, regarded as substantial by Simons etal. (2016), is the
small number of participants in the experimental and control conditions. Redick
etal. (2015) recommend 20 participants per compared groups as the absolute mini-
mum for reliable statistical power.
Another problem mentioned by researchers (e.g., Melby-Lervåg and Hulme
2013; Redick etal. 2015) is that visuospatial training that shows far transfer (e.g., to
academic measures) should also show intermediate transfer (e.g., to working mem-
Table 3.5 Problematic methodologic approaches and suggested solutions in research of
visuospatial and working memory training
Problem Suggested solution
No control group Incorporate a control condition
Passive control group Use an active control group
Non-random assignment to conditions Randomly assign participants to every condition
Not measuring a pretest baseline Assess all conditions at pretest
Small sample sizes Use at least 20 participants per condition
Far transfer without intermediate
transfer
Pilot the instruments to measure far and intermediate
transfer
Immediate testing only Include also delayed testing (e.g., after a month)
A single far transfer measure Use multiple far transfer measures
J. C. Castro-Alonso and D. H. Uttal
71
ory tests). By showing these two degrees of transfer simultaneously, it would be
safer to conclude that the training improved academic performance because the
relevant variable (e.g., visuospatial working memory) was also enhanced.
Finally, Redick etal. (2015) also made two suggestions for future research on
visuospatial training. The rst is to include delayed testing after months of training,
to see if the transfer effects that are recorded in immediate testing are durable. The
second is to use multiple measures of far or intermediate transfer, rather than one
instrument only.
3.4 Discussion
Science phenomena are usually represented and communicated using visual and
spatial information. Thus, visuospatial processing is a crucial aspect of understand-
ing and communicating topics of health and natural sciences. In this chapter we
provided evidence of a two-way relationship between visuospatial processing and
science education. One side of the coin shows that visuospatial processing helps
learning about science topics. The other side shows that education in science can
enhance different visuospatial abilities.
The examples we provided included diverse visuospatial abilities (e.g., 3D men-
tal rotation, 2D mental rotation, mental folding, spatial working memory, and dual
tasks of working memory), measured by different instruments (e.g., the Mental
Rotations Test and the Paper Folding Test), and related to diverse scientic disci-
plines (e.g., medicine, anatomy, surgery, dentistry, biology, chemistry, physics, and
geology).
We also described visuospatial training as a potentially positive method to
increase visuospatial abilities, and ideally induce far transfer that could lead to
increases in science academic results. Still, there are several problematic implemen-
tations in the research literature about visuospatial training, and we suggested some
potential solutions to avoid them in the future.
3.4.1 Instructional Implications forHealth andNatural
Sciences
A rst instructional implication, general in scope, is to showcase visuospatial pro-
cessing for science education. As commented by Wai and Kell (2017), formal edu-
cation is currently oriented to developing language and math skills, in detriment of
visuospatial abilities. Thus, the implication is to produce awareness of the impor-
tance of visuospatial processing for health and natural sciences.
A second implication, derived from the rst, is what Newcombe (2016) described
as spatializing the science curriculum. Teachers, lecturers, and instructional design-
3 Science Education andVisuospatial Processing
72
ers should include visuospatial processing activities in the classes of health and
natural sciences. Examples suggested by Wai and Kell (2017) are: (a) laboratory
and manipulative activities, for example in medicine, anatomy, and biology; (b)
exploring chemical phenomena with models of 3D molecules; and (c) reasoning
with 2D gures and shapes, for example, in physics.
A third implication, derived from the two rst, is that the visuospatial exercises
should be varied, and not limited, for example, to mental rotations. The activities
should be broad enough to include all the abilities that are dependent on visuospatial
processing (e.g., Castro-Alonso and Atit this volume, Chap. 2) and that will be use-
ful for syllabi in the sciences. For example, Levine etal. (2016) suggested using
spatial language, deciphering spatial relationships, scaling visualizations, and
understanding symbolic representations (e.g., maps and graphs).
A fourth implication is related to the inuence that teachers and instructors can
have on their students (e.g., Rosenthal and Jacobson 1968), and in particular how
they can be scientic role models (cf. Miller etal. 2015; Rochon et al. 2016). As
such, it is essential that these professionals show prociency in visuospatial activi-
ties when presenting topics and problems in health and natural sciences. The prob-
lem is that some teachers may lack visuospatial abilities (see Atit etal. 2018), and
thus remedial actions are suggested for these cases.
3.4.2 Future Research Directions
An important addition to the ndings that visuospatial processing is necessary for
education and performance in sciences, is to determine which visuospatial ability is
needed most for a specic task or topic in health and natural sciences. This research
gap has been noted in surgical training (Anastakis etal. 2000), dentistry (Hegarty
etal. 2009), chemistry and biochemistry (Oliver-Hoyo and Babilonia-Rosa 2017;
Wu and Shah 2004), and in other science elds (see Castro-Alonso etal. 2019a).
Another possible research direction is to investigate moderating variables that
affect visuospatial processing and science education, including: (a) the design of the
educational resources (see Castro-Alonso et al. this volume-b, Chap. 5; see also
Castro-Alonso etal. 2018b); (b) the sex or gender of the participants (see Castro-
Alonso and Jansen this volume, Chap. 4; see also Castro-Alonso etal. 2019b); and
(c) possible gender-science stereotypes (e.g., Miller etal. 2018).
Also, future research could investigate boundary conditions in the relation
between interactive science multimedia and visuospatial processing (see Castro-
Alonso and Fiorella this volume, Chap. 6; see also Wu and Shah 2004) or between
embodied science activities and visuospatial processing (see Castro-Alonso etal.
this volume-c, Chap. 7; see also Castro-Alonso etal. 2015).
The last research direction we suggest is based on the indication by Newcombe
and Frick (2010) that visuospatial activities can be incorporated into the classroom
and also be fostered outside the classroom, such as at home, or during play or sports.
J. C. Castro-Alonso and D. H. Uttal
73
We suggest future investigations of the effects of visuospatial activities beyond the
science classroom, to informal contexts, such as museums and outdoor activities.
3.4.3 Conclusion
Visuospatial processing is key to learning and succeeding in the disciplines of health
and natural sciences. There is a reciprocal relation between visuospatial processing
and science learning: (a) visuospatial processing helps learning about science, and
(b) training and education in science enhances visuospatial abilities. Therefore,
visuospatial training can be a potentially effective way to enhance visuospatial abil-
ities and support better outcomes in elds of health and natural sciences.
Nevertheless, far transfer from visuospatial training to science achievement is not
easy to achieve.
Acknowledgments Support from PIA-CONICYT Basal Funds for Centers of Excellence Project
FB0003 is gratefully acknowledged. The rst author is thankful to Mariana Poblete for her assis-
tance, and to Ignacio Jarabran for helping with the illustrations.
References
Adam, K.C. S., & Vogel, E.K. (2018). Improvements to visual working memory performance
with practice and feedback. PLoS One, 13(8), e0203279. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0203279.
Anastakis, D. J., Hamstra, S. J., & Matsumoto, E. D. (2000). Visual-spatial abilities in surgi-
cal training. The American Journal of Surgery, 179(6), 469–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0002-9610(00)00397-4.
Atit, K., Miller, D.I., Newcombe, N.S., & Uttal, D.H. (2018). Teachers’ spatial skills across dis-
ciplines and education levels: Exploring nationally representative data. Archives of Scientic
Psychology, 6(1), 130–137. https://doi.org/10.1037/arc0000041.
Au, J., Sheehan, E., Tsai, N., Duncan, G.J., Buschkuehl, M., & Jaeggi, S.M. (2015). Improving
uid intelligence with training on working memory: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin &
Review, 22(2), 366–377. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0699-x.
Baenninger, M., & Newcombe, N.S. (1989). The role of experience in spatial test performance: A
meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 20(5–6), 327–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00287729.
Barnett, S. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn?:
A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 612–637. https://doi.
org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.612.
Barrett, T.J., & Hegarty, M. (2016). Effects of interface and spatial ability on manipulation of
virtual models in a STEM domain. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 220–231. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.026.
Bartholomé, T., & Bromme, R. (2009). Coherence formation when learning from text and pictures:
What kind of support for whom? Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(2), 282–293. https://
doi.org/10.1037/a0014312.
Burnett, S.A., & Lane, D. M. (1980). Effects of academic instruction on spatial visualization.
Intelligence, 4(3), 233–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-2896(80)90021-5.
3 Science Education andVisuospatial Processing
74
Carter, C.S., Larussa, M.A., & Bodner, G.M. (1987). A study of two measures of spatial ability
as predictors of success in different levels of general chemistry. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 24(7), 645–657. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660240705.
Castro-Alonso, J.C., & Atit, K. (this volume). Different abilities controlled by visuospatial pro-
cessing. In J.C. Castro-Alonso (Ed.), Visuospatial processing for education in health and natu-
ral sciences (pp. 23–51). Cham: Springer.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20969-8_2.
Castro-Alonso, J.C., & Fiorella, L. (this volume). Interactive science multimedia and visuospatial
processing. In J.C. Castro-Alonso (Ed.), Visuospatial processing for education in health and
natural sciences (pp. 145–173). Cham: Springer.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20969-8_6.
Castro-Alonso, J.C., & Jansen, P. (this volume). Sex differences in visuospatial processing. In
J.C. Castro-Alonso (Ed.), Visuospatial processing for education in health and natural sciences
(pp. 81–110). Cham: Springer.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20969-8_4.
Castro-Alonso, J.C., & Uttal, D.H. (2019). Spatial ability for university biology education. In
S.Nazir, A.-M.Teperi, & A.Polak-Sopińska (Eds.), Advances in human factors in training,
education, and learning sciences: Proceedings of the AHFE 2018 International Conference on
Human Factors in Training, Education, and Learning Sciences (pp.283–291). Cham: Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93882-0_28.
Castro-Alonso, J.C., Ayres, P., & Paas, F. (2015). The potential of embodied cognition to improve
STEAM instructional dynamic visualizations. In X.Ge, D.Ifenthaler, & J.M. Spector (Eds.),
Emerging technologies for STEAM education: Full STEAM ahead (pp.113–136). NewYork:
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02573-5_7.
Castro-Alonso, J.C., Ayres, P., & Paas, F. (2016). Comparing apples and oranges? A critical look
at research on learning from statics versus animations. Computers & Education, 102, 234–243.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.09.004.
Castro-Alonso, J. C., Ayres, P., & Paas, F. (2018a). Computerized and adaptable tests to mea-
sure visuospatial abilities in STEM students. In T.Andre (Ed.), Advances in human factors
in training, education, and learning sciences: Proceedings of the AHFE 2017 International
Conference on Human Factors in Training, Education, and Learning Sciences (pp.337–349).
Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60018-5_33.
Castro-Alonso, J.C., Ayres, P., Wong, M., & Paas, F. (2018b). Learning symbols from permanent
and transient visual presentations: Don’t overplay the hand. Computers & Education, 116,
1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.08.011.
Castro-Alonso, J.C., Ayres, P., Wong, M., & Paas, F. (2019a). Visuospatial tests and multimedia
learning: The importance of employing relevant instruments. In S.Tindall-Ford, S.Agostinho,
& J. Sweller (Eds.), Advances in cognitive load theory: Rethinking teaching (pp. 89–99).
NewYork: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429283895-8.
Castro-Alonso, J.C., Wong, M., Adesope, O.O., Ayres, P., & Paas, F. (2019b). Gender imbalance
in instructional dynamic versus static visualizations: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology
Review, 31(2), 361–387.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09469-1.
Castro-Alonso, J. C., Ayres, P., & Paas, F. (this volume-a). VAR: A battery of computer-based
instruments to measure visuospatial processing. In J.C. Castro-Alonso (Ed.), Visuospatial pro-
cessing for education in health and natural sciences (pp. 207–229). Cham: Springer.https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20969-8_8.
Castro-Alonso, J.C., Ayres, P., & Sweller, J.(this volume-b). Instructional visualizations, cogni-
tive load theory, and visuospatial processing. In J.C. Castro-Alonso (Ed.), Visuospatial pro-
cessing for education in health and natural sciences (pp. 111–143). Cham: Springer.https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20969-8_5.
Castro-Alonso, J. C., Paas, F., & Ginns, P. (this volume-c). Embodied cognition, science edu-
cation, and visuospatial processing. In J. C. Castro-Alonso (Ed.), Visuospatial processing
for education in health and natural sciences (pp. 175–205). Cham: Springer. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-030-20969-8_7.
Cheng, Y.-L. (2017). The improvement of spatial ability and its relation to spatial training. In M.S.
Khine (Ed.), Visual-spatial ability in STEM education: Transforming research into practice
(pp.143–172). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44385-0_8.
J. C. Castro-Alonso and D. H. Uttal
75
Chooi, W.-T., & Thompson, L. A. (2012). Working memory training does not improve intel-
ligence in healthy young adults. Intelligence, 40(6), 531–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
intell.2012.07.004.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale:
Erlbaum.
Colom, R., Román, F.J., Abad, F.J., Shih, P. C., Privado, J., Froufe, M., etal. (2013). Adaptive
n-back training does not improve uid intelligence at the construct level: Gains on individual
tests suggest that training may enhance visuospatial processing. Intelligence, 41(5), 712–727.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2013.09.002.
Dougherty, M.R., Hamovitz, T., & Tidwell, J.W. (2016). Reevaluating the effectiveness of n-back
training on transfer through the Bayesian lens: Support for the null. Psychonomic Bulletin &
Review, 23(1), 306–316. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0865-9.
Eitel, A., Bender, L., & Renkl, A. (2019). Are seductive details seductive only when you think
they are relevant? An experimental test of the moderating role of perceived relevance. Applied
Cognitive Psychology, 33(1), 20–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3479.
Ekstrom, R.B., French, J.W., Harman, H.H., & Dermen, D. (1976). Kit of factor-referenced cog-
nitive tests. Princeton: Educational Testing Service.
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2017). Spontaneous spatial strategy use in learning from sci-
entic text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 49, 66–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
cedpsych.2017.01.002.
Garg, A.X., Norman, G., & Sperotable, L. (2001). How medical students learn spatial anatomy.
The Lancet, 357(9253), 363–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(00)03649-7.
Gathercole, S. E., Dunning, D. L., Holmes, J., & Norris, D. (2019). Working memory train-
ing involves learning new skills. Journal of Memory and Language, 105, 19–42. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.10.003.
Gibbons, R.D., Baker, R.J., & Skinner, D.B. (1986). Field articulation testing: A predictor of
technical skills in surgical residents. Journal of Surgical Research, 41(1), 53–57. https://doi.
org/10.1016/0022-4804(86)90008-9.
Goldstein, A.G., & Chance, J. E. (1965). Effects of practice on sex-related differences in per-
formance on Embedded Figures. Psychonomic Science, 3(1–12), 361–362. https://doi.
org/10.3758/bf03343180.
Guimarães, B., Firmino-Machado, J., Tsisar, S., Viana, B., Pinto-Sousa, M., Vieira-Marques, P.,
etal. (2019). The role of anatomy computer-assisted learning on spatial abilities of medical
students. Anatomical Sciences Education, 12(2), 138–153. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1795.
Gutierrez, J. C., Chigerwe, M., Ilkiw, J.E., Youngblood, P., Holladay, S.D., & Srivastava, S.
(2017). Spatial and visual reasoning: Do these abilities improve in rst-year veterinary medical
students exposed to an integrated curriculum? Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 44(4),
669–675. https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme.0915-158R3.
Halpern, D.F., Benbow, C.P., Geary, D.C., Gur, R.C., Hyde, J.S., & Gernsbacher, M.A. (2007).
The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public
Interest, 8(1), 1–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2007.00032.x.
Hambrick, D.Z., Libarkin, J.C., Petcovic, H.L., Baker, K.M., Elkins, J., Callahan, C.N., etal.
(2012). A test of the circumvention-of-limits hypothesis in scientic problem solving: The
case of geological bedrock mapping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(3),
397–403. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025927.
Hausmann, M. (2014). Arts versus science—Academic background implicitly activates gender
stereotypes on cognitive abilities with threat raising men’s (but lowering women’s) perfor-
mance. Intelligence, 46, 235–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.07.004.
Hegarty, M., & Sims, V.K. (1994). Individual differences in mental animation during mechanical
reasoning. Memory & Cognition, 22(4), 411–430. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03200867.
Hegarty, M., Keehner, M., Khooshabeh, P., & Montello, D. R. (2009). How spatial abilities
enhance, and are enhanced by, dental education. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(1),
61–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2008.04.006.
3 Science Education andVisuospatial Processing
76
Hoyek, N., Collet, C., Rastello, O., Fargier, P., Thiriet, P., & Guillot, A. (2009). Enhancement of
mental rotation abilities and its effect on anatomy learning. Teaching and Learning in Medicine,
21(3), 201–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401330903014178.
Jaeger, A.J., Taylor, A.R., & Wiley, J.(2016). When, and for whom, analogies help: The role of
spatial skills and interleaved presentation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(8), 1121–
1139. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000121.
Kail, R. (1986). The impact of extended practice on rate of mental rotation. Journal of Experimental
Child Psychology, 42(3), 378–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(86)90032-9.
Keehner, M., Tendick, F., Meng, M.V., Anwar, H.P., Hegarty, M., Stoller, M.L., etal. (2004).
Spatial ability, experience, and skill in laparoscopic surgery. The American Journal of Surgery,
188(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2003.12.059.
Keehner, M., Lippa, Y., Montello, D.R., Tendick, F., & Hegarty, M. (2006). Learning a spatial
skill for surgery: How the contributions of abilities change with practice. Applied Cognitive
Psychology, 20(4), 487–503. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1198.
Khine, M.S. (Ed.). (2017). Visual-spatial ability in STEM education. Cham: Springer. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-319-44385-0.
King, M.J., Katz, D.P., Thompson, L.A., & Macnamara, B.N. (2019). Genetic and environmen-
tal inuences on spatial reasoning: A meta-analysis of twin studies. Intelligence, 73, 65–77.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2019.01.001.
Könen, T., Strobach, T., & Karbach, J.(2016). Working memory. In T.Strobach & J. Karbach
(Eds.), Cognitive training: An overview of features and applications (pp. 59–68). Cham:
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42662-4_6.
Kozhevnikov, M., Motes, M.A., & Hegarty, M. (2007). Spatial visualization in physics problem
solving. Cognitive Science, 31(4), 549–579. https://doi.org/10.1080/15326900701399897.
Kühl, T., Stebner, F., Navratil, S.C., Fehringer, B.C. O.F., & Münzer, S. (2018). Text information
and spatial abilities in learning with different visualizations formats. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 110(4), 561–577. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000226.
Langlois, J., Bellemare, C., Toulouse, J., & Wells, G. A. (2015). Spatial abilities and technical
skills performance in health care: A systematic review. Medical Education, 49(11), 1065–1085.
https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12786.
Langlois, J., Bellemare, C., Toulouse, J., & Wells, G.A. (2019). Spatial abilities training in anat-
omy education: A systematic review. Anatomical Sciences Education. Advance online publica-
tion. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1873.
Lennon, P.A. (2000). Improving students’ exibility of closure while presenting biology content.
The American Biology Teacher, 62(3), 177–180. https://doi.org/10.2307/4450869.
Levine, S.C., Foley, A., Lourenco, S., Ehrlich, S., & Ratliff, K. (2016). Sex differences in spatial
cognition: Advancing the conversation. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science,
7(2), 127–155. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1380.
Li, S.-C., Schmiedek, F., Huxhold, O., Röcke, C., Smith, J., & Lindenberger, U. (2008). Working
memory plasticity in old age: Practice gain, transfer, and maintenance. Psychology and Aging,
23(4), 731–742. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014343.
Loftus, J. J., Jacobsen, M., & Wilson, T. D. (2017). Learning and assessment with images: A
view of cognitive load through the lens of cerebral blood ow. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 48(4), 1030–1046. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12474.
Lord, T. R. (1985). Enhancing the visuo-spatial aptitude of students. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 22(5), 395–405. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660220503.
Lord, T.R. (1990). Enhancing learning in the life sciences through spatial perception. Innovative
Higher Education, 15(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00889733.
Luer, R.S., Zumwalt, A.C., Romney, C.A., & Hoagland, T.M. (2012). Effect of visual–spa-
tial ability on medical students’ performance in a gross anatomy course. Anatomical Sciences
Education, 5(1), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.264.
J. C. Castro-Alonso and D. H. Uttal
77
Macnab, W., & Johnstone, A.H. (1990). Spatial skills which contribute to competence in the bio-
logical sciences. Journal of Biological Education, 24(1), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/0021
9266.1990.9655099.
Mathewson, J. H. (1999). Visual-spatial thinking: An aspect of science over-
looked by educators. Science Education, 83(1), 33–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/
(SICI)1098-237X(199901)83:1<33::AID-SCE2>3.0.CO;2-Z.
Mathewson, J. H. (2005). The visual core of science: Denition and applications to edu-
cation. International Journal of Science Education, 27(5), 529–548. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09500690500060417.
Mayer, R.E., & Sims, V.K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions
of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3),
389–401. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.86.3.389.
Melby-Lervåg, M., & Hulme, C. (2013). Is working memory training effective? A meta-analytic
review. Developmental Psychology, 49(2), 270–291. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028228.
Melby-Lervåg, M., Redick, T.S., & Hulme, C. (2016). Working memory training does not improve
performance on measures of intelligence or other measures of “far transfer”: Evidence from
a meta-analytic review. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(4), 512–534. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1745691616635612.
Meneghetti, C., Cardillo, R., Mammarella, I.C., Caviola, S., & Borella, E. (2017). The role of prac-
tice and strategy in mental rotation training: Transfer and maintenance effects. Psychological
Research, 81(2), 415–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-016-0749-2.
Miller, D.I., Eagly, A. H., & Linn, M. C. (2015). Women’s representation in science predicts
national gender-science stereotypes: Evidence from 66 nations. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 107(3), 631–644. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000005.
Miller, D.I., Nolla, K. M., Eagly, A.H., & Uttal, D.H. (2018). The development of children’s
gender-science stereotypes: A meta-analysis of 5 decades of U.S.Draw-A-Scientist studies.
Child Development, 89(6), 1943–1955. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13039.
Minear, M., Brasher, F., Guerrero, C.B., Brasher, M., Moore, A., & Sukeena, J.(2016). A simulta-
neous examination of two forms of working memory training: Evidence for near transfer only.
Memory & Cognition, 44(7), 1014–1037. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-016-0616-9.
Moreau, D. (2012). Differentiating two- from three-dimensional mental rotation training effects.
The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(7), 1399–1413. https://doi.org/10.108
0/17470218.2012.744761.
Newcombe, N. S. (2016). Thinking spatially in the science classroom. Current Opinion in
Behavioral Sciences, 10, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2016.04.010.
Newcombe, N. S., & Frick, A. (2010). Early education for spatial intelligence:
Why, what, and how. Mind, Brain, and Education, 4(3), 102–111. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1751-228X.2010.01089.x.
Oliver-Hoyo, M., & Babilonia-Rosa, M.A. (2017). Promotion of spatial skills in chemistry and
biochemistry education at the college level. Journal of Chemical Education, 94(8), 996–1006.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00094.
Owen, A.M., Hampshire, A., Grahn, J.A., Stenton, R., Dajani, S., Burns, A.S., etal. (2010).
Putting brain training to the test. Nature, 465(7299), 775–778. https://doi.org/10.1038/
nature09042.
Pallrand, G.J., & Seeber, F. (1984). Spatial ability and achievement in introductory physics. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 21(5), 507–516. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660210508.
Peters, M., Laeng, B., Latham, K., Jackson, M., Zaiyouna, R., & Richardson, C. (1995). A redrawn
Vandenberg and Kuse Mental Rotations Test: Different versions and factors that affect perfor-
mance. Brain and Cognition, 28(1), 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1006/brcg.1995.1032.
Peters, M., Lehmann, W., Takahira, S., Takeuchi, Y., & Jordan, K. (2006). Mental Rotation Test
performance in four cross-cultural samples (N = 3367): Overall sex differences and the role
of academic program in performance. Cortex, 42(7), 1005–1014. https://doi.org/10.1016/
s0010-9452(08)70206-5.
3 Science Education andVisuospatial Processing
78
Piburn, M.D., Reynolds, S.J., McAuliffe, C., Leedy, D.E., Birk, J.P., & Johnson, J.K. (2005).
The role of visualization in learning from computer-based images. International Journal of
Science Education, 27(5), 513–527. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690412331314478.
Pribyl, J.R., & Bodner, G.M. (1987). Spatial ability and its role in organic chemistry: A study
of four organic courses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(3), 229–240. https://doi.
org/10.1002/tea.3660240304.
Provo, J., Lamar, C., & Newby, T. (2002). Using a cross section to train veterinary students to
visualize anatomical structures in three dimensions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
39(1), 10–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10007.
Redick, T.S., Shipstead, Z., Harrison, T.L., Hicks, K. L., Fried, D. E., Hambrick, D. Z., et al.
(2013). No evidence of intelligence improvement after working memory training: A random-
ized, placebo-controlled study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(2), 359–
379. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029082.
Redick, T. S., Shipstead, Z., Wiemers, E.A., Melby-Lervåg, M., & Hulme, C. (2015). What’s
working in working memory training? An educational perspective. Educational Psychology
Review, 27(4), 617–633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9314-6.
Resnick, I., & Shipley, T.F. (2013). Breaking new ground in the mind: An initial study of mental
brittle transformation and mental rigid rotation in science experts. Cognitive Processing, 14(2),
143–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-013-0548-2.
Risucci, D., Geiss, A., Gellman, L., Pinard, B., & Rosser, J.(2001). Surgeon-specic factors in the
acquisition of laparoscopic surgical skills. The American Journal of Surgery, 181(4), 289–293.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9610(01)00574-8.
Roach, V.A., Fraser, G.M., Kryklywy, J.H., Mitchell, D.G. V., & Wilson, T.D. (2019). Guiding
low spatial ability individuals through visual cueing: The dual importance of where and when
to look. Anatomical Sciences Education, 12(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1783.
Rochon, P.A., Davidoff, F., & Levinson, W. (2016). Women in academic medicine leadership: Has
anything changed in 25 years? Academic Medicine, 91(8), 1053–1056. https://doi.org/10.1097/
acm.0000000000001281.
Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. The Urban Review, 3(1),
16–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02322211.
Sala, G., & Gobet, F. (2017). Does far transfer exist? Negative evidence from chess, music, and
working memory training. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(6), 515–520.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417712760.
Sanchez, C. A. (2012). Enhancing visuospatial performance through video game training to
increase learning in visuospatial science domains. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(1),
58–65. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0177-7.
Schweppe, J., Eitel, A., & Rummer, R. (2015). The multimedia effect and its stability over time.
Learning and Instruction, 38, 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.03.001.
Seufert, T., Schütze, M., & Brünken, R. (2009). Memory characteristics and modality in multime-
dia learning: An aptitude-treatment-interaction study. Learning and Instruction, 19(1), 28–42.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.01.002.
Shipstead, Z., Redick, T. S., & Engle, R. W. (2012). Is working memory training effective?
Psychological Bulletin, 138(4), 628–654. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027473.
Simons, D. J., Boot, W.R., Charness, N., Gathercole, S. E., Chabris, C. F., Hambrick, D.Z.,
etal. (2016). Do “brain-training” programs work? Psychological Science in the Public Interest,
17(3), 103–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100616661983.
Soveri, A., Antfolk, J., Karlsson, L., Salo, B., & Laine, M. (2017). Working memory training revis-
ited: A multi-level meta-analysis of n-back training studies. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,
24(4), 1077–1096. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1217-0.
Stephenson, C.L., & Halpern, D.F. (2013). Improved matrix reasoning is limited to training on
tasks with a visuospatial component. Intelligence, 41(5), 341–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
intell.2013.05.006.
J. C. Castro-Alonso and D. H. Uttal
79
Stericker, A., & LeVesconte, S. (1982). Effect of brief training on sex-related differences in visual–
spatial skill. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(5), 1018–1029. https://doi.
org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.1018.
Stieff, M., & Uttal, D.H. (2015). How much can spatial training improve STEM achievement?
Educational Psychology Review, 27(4), 607–615. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9304-8.
Stieff, M., Origenes, A., DeSutter, D., Lira, M., Banevicius, L., Tabang, D., et al. (2018).
Operational constraints on the mental rotation of STEM representations. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 110(8), 1160–1174. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000258.
Stull, A.T., & Hegarty, M. (2016). Model manipulation and learning: Fostering representational
competence with virtual and concrete models. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(4),
509–527. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000077.
Thorndike, E.L., & Woodworth, R.S. (1901). The inuence of improvement in one mental func-
tion upon the efciency of other functions (I). Psychological Review, 8(3), 247–261.
Uttal, D.H., & Cohen, C.A. (2012). Spatial thinking and STEM education: When, why, and how?
In B.H. Ross (Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 57, pp.147–181). San Diego:
Academic. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-394293-7.00004-2.
Uttal, D. H., Meadow, N.G., Tipton, E., Hand, L. L., Alden, A.R., Warren, C., etal. (2013).
The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin,
139(2), 352–402. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028446.
von Bastian, C.C., & Eschen, A. (2016). Does working memory training have to be adaptive?
Psychological Research, 80(2), 181–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-015-0655-z.
von Bastian, C.C., & Oberauer, K. (2014). Effects and mechanisms of working memory training: A
review. Psychological Research, 78(6), 803–820. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-013-0524-6.
Vorstenbosch, M.A. T.M., Klaassen, T.P. F.M., Donders, A.R. T., Kooloos, J.G. M., Bolhuis,
S. M., & Laan, R. F. J. M. (2013). Learning anatomy enhances spatial ability. Anatomical
Sciences Education, 6(4), 257–262. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1346.
Wai, J., & Kell, H.J. (2017). What innovations have we already lost?: The importance of iden-
tifying and developing spatial talent. In M.S. Khine (Ed.), Visual-spatial ability in STEM
education: Transforming research into practice (pp. 109–124). Cham: Springer. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-319-44385-0_6.
Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C.P. (2009). Spatial ability for STEM domains: Aligning over 50
years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidies its importance. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 101(4), 817–835. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016127.
Wanzel, K.R., Hamstra, S.J., Anastakis, D.J., Matsumoto, E.D., & Cusimano, M.D. (2002).
Effect of visual-spatial ability on learning of spatially-complex surgical skills. The Lancet,
359(9302), 230–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07441-X.
Wiegmann, D.A., Dansereau, D. F., McCagg, E.C., Rewey, K.L., & Pitre, U. (1992). Effects
of knowledge map characteristics on information processing. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 17(2), 136–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X(92)90055-4.
Wright, R., Thompson, W. L., Ganis, G., Newcombe, N.S., & Kosslyn, S.M. (2008). Training
generalized spatial skills. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(4), 763–771. https://doi.
org/10.3758/PBR.15.4.763.
Wu, H.-K., & Shah, P. (2004). Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science
Education, 88(3), 465–492. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10126.
3 Science Education andVisuospatial Processing
