conception of a facet-oriented spatial ability test weitensfelder.pdf · facet-oriented spatial...

Division of Psychological Assessment and Applied Psychometrics

Faculty of PsychologyUniversity of Vienna

Conception of a facet-oriented spatial ability test

(TARV – Test of Applied Relations and Visuo-spatial abilities)

Lisbeth Weitensfelder

Division of Psychological Assessment and Applied PsychometricsFaculty of Psychology, University of Vienna



Content1. Spatial abilites and spatial facets

2. A new idea: Conception of the TARV and it‘s facets

3. TARV-Items (examples)

4. Results



Spatial abilities„ability to generate, retain, retrieve and transform well-structured images“ (Lohman, 1996)

No unitary construct: Thurstone: defined space 1938 as one factor, but subdivided it 1950 (Rost, 1976)

Subclassification as well by Lohman (1979), Linn & Petersen (1985)

So far: No consistent definition, which and how many facets are necessary to define the construct of spatial abilities

1. Spatial abilities& spatial facets

2. Conception ofthe TARV

3. TARV-Items 4. Results



Thurstone‘s facets(1950)

Lohman‘s facets (1979)

Linn & Petersen‘s facets (1985)

Spatial Relations(imagining a configuration that is moved into different positions)

Spatial Relations (Speeded Rotation)(speed at simple rotation tasks)

Mental Rotation(rather speed than accuracy of rotation)

Visualization (imagination how parts of a configuration are adjourned)

Visualization(complex tasks without time pressure)

Spatial Visualization (complicated, multistep tasks, e.g. paper folding)

Spatial Orientation(imagination where self in spacewould be placed)

Spatial Orientation(imagination how an object looksfrom another side)

Spatial Perception(determation of spatialrelationships with reference tothe own body )

Examples for spatial abilities in literature






Thurstone‘s facets(1950)

Lohman‘s facets (1979)

Linn & Petersen‘s facets (1985)

Spatial Relations(imagining a configuration that is moved into different positions)

Spatial Relations (Speeded Rotation)(speed at simple rotation tasks)

Mental Rotation(rather speed than accuracy of rotation)

Visualization (imagination how parts of a configuration are adjourned)

Visualization(complex tasks without time pressure)

Spatial Visualization (complicated, multistep tasks, e.g. paper folding)

Spatial Orientation(imagination where self in spacewould be placed)

Spatial Orientation(imagination how an object looksfrom another side)

Spatial Perception(determation of spatialrelationships with reference tothe own body )

Examples for spatial abilities in literature

→ even with similar labellings, the facets content different abilities and the demarcation between the facets is not always clear






Common tests for spatial abilities

Usually tests base on a single facet of spatialability, e.g.:

3DW (Gittler, 1990), MRT (Vandenberg & Kuse, 1978): mental rotationSchlauchfiguren (Stumpf & Fay, 1983): orientation

Measurement of one facet is justifiable, ifprognostic validity of the test is sufficiently high

But: Some jobs require more than one facet ofspatial abilities (e.g. pilots)

Different facets show different gender effects






Development of a new test: TARV

Idea: Developing a test that contains more than mental rotation Clear demarcation between spatial facets → adapted definition of spatial facets






Development of a new test: TARV

3 different facets of spatial abilities (based on an adaption of Thurstone‘s and Lohman‘s subclassifications):

Relations: identification of size and distance proportionsRotation: mental rotation of objects or parts of objects Orientation: location (esp.: direction), where an object or self is placed






TARV-facets when parking a car

Relations (of size and distance): Looking for parking slots: „Does the car fit in the parking slot?“

Rotation: Parking: „I know the car fits in this slot, but to get in there, I have to move backwards and turn in correctly.“

Orientation: Getting back: „I know I parked the car about a hundred metres away… But in which direction?“






TARV design: Facets and itemsSubjects have to perform two different sorts of tasks:

Derivation from 3D to 2D: 2dimensional plans have to be compared with a given 3D-object

Derivation from 2D to 3D: A 3dimensional object has to be compared with given 2D-plans

Facet 1: Relations

Facet 2: Rotation

Facet 3: Orientation

Derivation from 3D to 2D

Derivation from 2D to 3D






TARV-Items (examples): Derivation from 3D to 2D

Subjects have to compare a plan with an object and decide, whether the plan fits to the object or not. (Here: the given plan does fit.)

A 3dimensional lettering allowsorientation. An instruction phase clarifiessides.






TARV-Items (examples): Derivation from 2D to 3D






Sequential presentation of the items

Original version: Subjects had to answer 3 plans for every object in a rowAn item is only considered correct if all 3 answers for every object are correct But: time consuming, bottom effects (difficult items) → now just 2 plans for every object that both have to be correct (guessing probability: .25)






Item Example: Relations

perspective of the plan: top

front

correct plan:



3. TARV-Items4. Results



front

perspective of the plan: bottom

Item Example: Rotation

Incorrect perspectives for rotation items often content incorrect angles between one object andanother. E.g. in the plan the green part could be tilted differently than in the object.






Item Example: Orientation

correct plan:






Results: One or more dimension?

A Rasch-model was calculated in an incomplete design of 3 different TARV-versions with several linking items: – Architecture version (9 items): n = 140 (unproctored)– Engineering version (10 items): n = 124 (unproctored) – Aviation version (10 items): n = 59 (proctored)

In total: 22 different items (15 items without the aviation version)






Results: One dimension!All 3 facets as defined in the TARV belong to a single dimension according to the median split

LR-value: 17.273, critical chi-square value: 32.671 (a=5%); p-value = .694 (with aviators); LR-value: 7.939, critical chi-square value: 23.685 (a=5%); p-value = .892 (without aviators)

(Not enough demographic data for gender split.)

Median split for all items with (left) and without (right) aviators; the aviation version differed in the presentation mode of the items






DiscussionQuestion, whether different facets contribute to different difficulty levels → future research with LLTM

evidence for different difficulties: coherent to literature, men scored higher in rotation of the TARV aviation version. Those effects could not be found in the other TARV versions.

Regarding TARV results, the spatial facets form one dimension. → Spatial abilites as measured in the TARV consist of more than e.g. rotation, but it still seems to be one ability!

eventually comparable to mathematics: calculation is more than multiplications

Time-consuming sequential items → currently: work on a multiple-choice version






Thank you!

http://psychologie.univie.ac.at/diagostik www.testzentrum.at

[email protected]



References• Gittler, G. (1990). Dreidimensionaler Würfeltest (3DW). Ein rasch-skalierter Test zur Messung des räumlichen Vorstellungsvermögens.

Weinheim: Beltz.

• Gittler, G. & Arendasy, M. (2003). Endlosschleifen. Psychometrische Grundlagen des Aufgabentyps EP. Diagnostica, 49, 164–175.

• Gruber, M. (2008). Einsatz- und Anwendungsmöglichkeiten des 3DW und des EST bei der Selektion und Leistungsüberprüfung von Fluglotsen und Linienpiloten. Unpublished diploma thesis, University of Vienna.

• Grubesic, A. (2010). Raumvorstellung aus Sicht des TARV-F 4.0 und EST. Eine Validierung anhand von Extremgruppen. Unpublished diploma thesis, University of Vienna.

• Linn, M. C. & Petersen, A.C. (1985). Emergence and Characterization of Sex Differences in Spatial Abilities: A Meta-Analysis. Child Development, 56, 1479–1498.

• Lohman, D.F. (1979). Spatial Ability: A Review and Reanalysis of the Correlational Literature. Technical Report No. 8, Aptitude Research Project, School of Education, Stanford University.

• Lohman, D. F. (1996). Spatial Ability and G. In Ian Dennis & Patrick Tapsfield (Eds.), Human Abilities: Their Nature and Measurement (pp. 97–116). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

• Rost, D. (1976). Der Begabungsfaktor „Raumvorstellung“. Theorie und Training. Dissertation, University of Hamburg.

• Stumpf, H. & Fay, E. (1983). Schlauchfiguren. Ein Test zur Beurteilung des räumlichen Vorstellungsvermögens. Göttingen: Hogrefe.

• Vandenberg, S.G. & Kuse, A.R. (1978). Mental Rotations, A Group Test of Three-Dimensional Spatial Visualization. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 47, 599–604.

• Voyer, D., Voyer, S. & Bryden, M.P. (1995). Magnitude of Sex Differences in Spatial Abilities: A Meta-Analysis and Consideration of Critical Variables. Psychological Bulletin, 117/2, 250–270.

conception of a facet-oriented spatial ability test weitensfelder.pdf · facet-oriented spatial...

Documents