An Overview of Tests of Cognitive Spatial Ability
N. E. Study
Department of Technology
Virginia State University
Abstract
There are a wide variety of tests available to assess different aspects of cognitive spatial
ability. Tests of 3-dimensional rotation are often used in assessing the spatial abilities of
engineering students. However, the ability to mentally rotate objects in three dimensions is only
part of a complex array of spatial abilities that students may use when creating the mental models
necessary for success in engineering design, problem solving, and other coursework in the STEM
fields. This paper will describe a variety of tests and discuss which aspects of cognitive spatial
ability they are designed to measure. Having an understanding of a wider range of assessment
tools could potentially improve the quality of research in the engineering fields especially when
considering comparisons of student success across the STEM fields based on cognitive spatial
ability.
Introduction
Specialized visualization abilities are necessary for success in the different areas of STEM
education. The ability to mentally rotate objects is important in engineering fields and tests of 3dimensional rotation, such as the Purdue Spatial Visualization Test by Guay (1976) and the
Mental Rotation Test by Vandenberg and Kuse (1978), are often used in assessing the spatial
abilities of engineering students.
Scientific visualization, graphing, and using multiple representations are important in
mathematics and science teaching (Thomas, 1995).
In chemistry, closure flexibility, the ability to identify patterns in the midst of distracting
stimuli, is needed for the identification of similarities and differences between complex molecular
structures. And 2D mental rotations, similar to those assessed with card rotation tests, are useful in
the identification of isomers (Wu & Shah, 2004).
In physics, tests of speeded mental rotation have been used to study the correlation between
visualization ability and accurately solving kinematics problems (Kozhevnikov, Motes & Hegarty,
2007).
92
2012 Galveston, Texas
Selected Tests of Cognitive Spatial Ability
According to Reio, Czarnolewski, and Eliot (2004), some tests of spatial ability have
relationships with everyday activities which may make these tests more appropriate for assessing
the spatial abilities of students with different academic backgrounds and pretest experiences.
These tests include the Card Rotation Test (French, Ekstrom, & Price, 1963); the Hidden Figures
Test (Ekstrom, French, Harman, and Dermen, 1976); the Gestalt Completion Test (Eliot &
Czarnolewski, 1999); and the Visual Memory Test (Stumpf, 1992). Following are some sample
images of these tests and others that assess different aspects of spatial visualization ability.
The Card Rotation Test (French, Ekstrom, & Price, 1963) is a 4 minute timed test with 112
items and measures 2-dimensional orientation and rotation. Given the object on the left, the
subject must check whether the object on the right is the same (S) or different (D) (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Card Rotation Test example
The Hidden Figures Test (Ekstrom, et.al., 1976) measures flexibility of closure. It is a 5
minute timed test with 12 items. The subject must select which one of the set of five geometric
shapes is hidden in the figure below the set (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Hidden Figures Test example
66th EDGD Mid-Year Conference Proceedings
93
The Gestalt Completion Test (Eliot & Czarnolewski, 1999), a 5 minute 24 item test, measures
speed of closure, which is the ability to construct a whole item from incomplete material (Figure
3). There are multiple versions of this test available in different formats by different authors.
Figure 3. Gestalt Completion Test example
The Revised Minnesota Paper Form Board Test (Likert & Quasha, 1995) is a 20 minute timed
test with 64 items that measures 2D spatial visualization. In this test, subjects are shown geometric
shapes and then must select which one of the five completed figures can be made from the shapes
(Figure 4).
Figure 4. Revised Minnesota Paper Form Board Test example
The Raven’s Progressive Matrices test (Raven, 1938) measures abstract reasoning using
spatial components (Figure 5). There are multiple iterations of the test including the Colored
Progressive Matrices and Advanced Progressive matrices.
94
2012 Galveston, Texas
Figure 5. Raven’s Progressive Matrices test example
The Punched Holes Test (Ekstrom, et.al., 1976) is a timed 3 minute 10 item test that measures
spatial ability. In this test, the image on the left shows a sequence of folds in a piece of paper,
through which a hole or set of holes is punched. The subject must choose which of the five images
on the right would correspond with the unfolded paper (Figure 6). Tests of similar format are also
referred to as paper folding tests.
Figure 6. Punched Holes Test example
The Surface Development Test (Ekstrom, et.al., 1976) is a test of spatial ability that requires
the subject to create a mental image of the object on the right built from the flat pattern on the left.
Then they must determine which letters on the 3D image correspond with the numbers on the flat
pattern (Figure 7).
Figure 7. Surface Development Test example
66th EDGD Mid-Year Conference Proceedings
95
Reliability and Validity of Selected Tests
Card Rotation Test
Reliability: Kuder-Richardson coefficient of .72
Gestalt Completion Test
Reliability: Spearman-Brown correlation correction yields a coefficient of .68
Hidden Figures Test
Reliability: Kuder-Richardson coefficient of .76
Revised Minnesota Paper Form Board Test
Reliability: Kuder-Richardson coefficient of .61
Raven’s Progressive Matrices Test
Reliability: Test-retest reliability coefficients range from .76 to .91.
Punched Holes Test
Reliability: Kuder-Richardson coefficient of .68
Surface Development Test
Reliability: Kuder-Richardson coefficient of .84
(Goldman, Osborne, & Mitchell, 1996)
Discussion
The tests described here are only a few of the many tests that that assess cognitive spatial
ability. In the research for this paper over fifty different tests were found, some of which are
derivations of the above tests, and some of which are completely different in format and scope.
The spatial abilities measured in the tests investigated ranged from 2D and 3D mental rotations, to
environmental scanning, speeded visual exploration, flexibility and speed of closure, long-term
spatial location memory and measurement of space. Many of the tests have similar levels of
reliability and validity so the choice of test would depend on which particular visualization skills
are to be assessed. And these skills may be field specific because as noted earlier in the paper,
different STEM fields require different visualization abilities for student success.
Because there is often significant overlap in the core requirements for study in the STEM
fields, especially among courses in mathematics, physics, or chemistry and research across
disciplines is becoming more widespread, using multiple or alternate assessments should be
considered. More research is planned to investigate additional tests and categorize them based on
what they assess and how they may be appropriate to specific STEM disciplines.
Some of the questions that have arisen from this initial research include:
•
Would the remediation that has resulted in increased scores on tests of 3D mental rotation
like the PSVT also improve the scores on tests that assess 2D rotation, environmental
scanning, speed of closure and so on?
96
2012 Galveston, Texas
•
Would the improved GPAs in STEM courses for engineering students who received
remediation based on 3D rotations cause a similar gain for students enrolled in majors
such as mathematics, chemistry, or physics?
•
If engineering students are having problems in their mathematics, chemistry, or physics
courses, would assessing their visualization abilities with tests more specifically targeted
to skills in those fields be advantageous?
References
Ekstrom, R. B., French, J. W., Harman, H. H. & Dermen, D. (1976). Manual for kit of factorreferenced cognitive tests. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Eliot, J., & Czarnolewski, M. Y. (1999). A composite Gestalt completion test. Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 89, 294-300.
French, J., Ekstrom, R., & Price, L. (1963). Kit of reference tests for cognitive factors. Princeton,
NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Goldman, B. A., Osborne, W. L., & Mitchell, D. F. (1996). Directory of unpublished experimental
measures. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Guay, R. B. (1976). Purdue spatial visualization test – visualization of rotations. West Lafayette,
IN. Purdue Research Foundation.
Kozhevnikov, M., Motes, M., & Hegarty, M., (2007). Spatial visualization in physics problem
solving. Cognitive Science, 31, 549-579.
Likert, R., & Quasha, W. (1995). Revised Minnesota paper form board test manual (2nd ed.). San
Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
Olson, D. M., & Eliot, J. (1986). Relationships between experiences, processing style, and sexrelated differences in performance on spatial tests. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 62, 447-460.
Raven, J. C. (1938). Progressive matrices: A perceptual test of intelligence. London: H.K. Lewis.
Reio, T. G., Czarnolewski, M., & Eliot, J. (2004). Handedness and spatial ability: Differential
patterns of relationships. Laterality, 9 (3), 339-358
Stumpf, H. (1992). A test of visual memory. Baltimore, MD: Center for Talented Youths.
Thomas, D. A. (Ed.) (1995). Scientific visualization in mathematics and science teaching.
Charlottesville, VA: AACE.
Vandenberg, S. G., & Kuse, A. R. (1978). Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional
spatial visualization. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47, 599–604.
Wu, H., & Shah, P. (2004). Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science
Education, 88 (3), 465-492.
66th EDGD Mid-Year Conference Proceedings
97