Search

Understanding the development of spatial skills is important for promoting school readiness and improving overall success in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields (e.g., Wai, Lubinski, Benbow, & Steiger, 2010). Children use their spatial skills to understand the world, including visualizing how objects fit together, and can practice them via spatial assembly activities (e.g., puzzles or blocks). These skills are incorporated into measures of overall intelligence and have been linked to success in subjects like mathematics (Mix & Cheng, 2012) and science (Pallrand & Seeber, 1984; Pribyl & Bodner, 1987). This monograph sought to answer four questions about early spatial skill development: 1) Can we reliably measure spatial skills in 3- and 4-year-olds?; 2) Do spatial skills measured at 3 predict spatial skills at age 5?; 3) Do preschool spatial skills predict mathematics skills at age 5?; and 4) What factors contribute to individual differences in preschool spatial skills (e.g., SES, gender, fine-motor skills, vocabulary, and executive function)? Longitudinal data generated from a new spatial skill test for 3-year-old children, called the TOSA (Test of Spatial Assembly), show that it is a reliable and valid measure of early spatial skills that provides strong prediction to spatial skills measured with established tests at age 5. New data using this measure finds links between early spatial skill and mathematics, language, and executive function skills. Analyses suggest that preschool spatial experiences may play a central role in children's mathematical skills around the time of school entry. Executive function skills provide an additional unique contribution to predicting mathematical performance. In addition, individual differences, specifically socioeconomic status, are related to spatial and mathematical skill. We conclude by exploring ways of providing rich early spatial experiences to children., (© 2017 The Society for Research in Child Development, Inc.)

Previous research has indicated a close link between spatial and mathematical thinking. However, what shared processes account for this link? In this study, we focused on the spatial skill of map reading and the mathematical skill of proportional reasoning and investigated whether scaling, or the ability to relate information in different-sized representations, is a shared process. Scaling was experimentally manipulated in both tasks. In the map task, 4- and 5-year-olds (N=50) were asked to point to the same position shown on a map in a larger referent space on a touch screen. The sizes of the maps were varied systematically, such that some trials required scaling and some did not (i.e., the map had the same size as the referent space). In the proportional reasoning task, children were presented with different relative amounts of juice and water and were asked to estimate each mixture on a rating scale. Again, some trials required scaling, but others could be solved by directly mapping the proportional components onto the rating scale. Children's absolute errors in locating targets in the map task were closely related to their performance in the proportional reasoning task even after controlling for age and verbal intelligence. Crucially, this was only true for trials that required scaling, whereas performance on nonscaled trials was not related. These results shed light on the mechanisms involved in the close connection between spatial and mathematical thinking early in life., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

There is evidence suggesting that children's play with spatial toys (e.g., puzzles and blocks) correlates with spatial development. Females play less with spatial toys than do males, which arguably accounts for males' spatial advantages; children with high socioeconomic status (SES) also show an advantage, though SES-related differences in spatial play have been less studied than gender-related differences. Using a large, nationally representative sample from the standardization study of the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence-Fourth Edition, and controlling for other cognitive abilities, we observed a specific relation between parent-reported frequency of spatial play and Block Design scores that was invariant across gender and SES. Reported spatial play was higher for boys than for girls, but controlling for spatial play did not eliminate boys' relative advantage on this subtest. SES groups did not differ in reported frequency of spatial play. Future research should consider quality as well as quantity of play, and should explore underlying mechanisms to evaluate causality., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Spatial scaling is an important prerequisite for many spatial tasks and involves an understanding of how distances in different-sized spaces correspond. Previous studies have found evidence for such an understanding in preschoolers; however, the mental processes involved remain unclear. In the present study, we investigated whether children and adults use mental transformations to scale distances in space. Adults and 4- and 5-year-old children (N = 60) were asked to use maps to locate target objects in a larger referent space on a touch screen. The size of the referent space was held constant, but the sizes of the maps were varied systematically, resulting in 7 scaling factors. A linear increase in response times and errors with increasing scaling factor suggested that participants of every age group mentally transformed the size of the map to compare it to the referent, providing evidence for an analog imagery strategy in children's and adults' spatial scaling., ((PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved).)

Mental rotation is an important spatial skill. However, there is controversy concerning its early development and susceptibility to intervention. In the present study, we assessed individual differences in the mental rotation abilities of children between 3½ and 5½ years of age, using a touch screen paradigm to simplify task demands. A figure or its mirror image was presented in 8 different orientations, and children indicated in which of two holes the figure would fit by touching one of the holes on the screen. Task instructions were varied in three conditions, giving the children the opportunity to gather manual or observational experience with rotations of different stimuli, or giving no additional experience. Children's error rates and response times increased linearly with increasing angular disparity between the figure and the hole by the age of 5 years, but 4-year-olds were found to respond at chance for all angular disparities, despite the use of a touch screen paradigm. Both manual and observational experience increased the response accuracy of 5-year-olds, especially for children already performing well. However, there was no effect on 4-year-olds. Results point to an emerging readiness to use mental rotation and profit from observational and manual experience at age 5.

Proponents of a geometric module have argued that instances of young children's use of features as well as geometry to reorient can be explained by a two-stage process. In this model, only the first stage is a true reorientation, accomplished by using geometric information alone; features are considered in a second stage using association (Lee, Shusterman & Spelke, 2006). This account is contradicted by the data from two experiments. Experiment 1a sets the stage for Experiment 1b by showing that young children use geometric information to reorient in a complex geometric figure without a single principal axis of symmetry (an octagon). In such a figure, there are two sets of geometrically congruent corners, with four corners in each set. The addition of a colored wall leads to the existence of three geometrically congruent but, crucially, all unmarked corners; using the colored wall to distinguish among them could not be done associatively. In Experiment 1b, both 3- and 5-year-old children showed true non-associative reorientation using features by performing at above-chance levels on all-white trials. Experiment 2 used a paradigm without distinctive geometry, modeled on Lee et al. (2006), involving an equilateral triangle of hiding places located within a circular enclosure, but with a large stable feature rather than a small moveable one. Four-year-olds (the age group studied by Lee et al.) used features at above-chance levels. Thus, features can be used to reorient, in a way not dependent on association, in contradiction to the two-stage version of the modular view.

When mobile organisms are spatially disoriented, for instance by rapid repetitive movement, they must re-establish orientation. Past research has shown that the geometry of enclosing spaces is consistently used for reorientation by a wide variety of species, but that non-geometric features are not always used. Based on these findings, some investigators have postulated a species-universal 'geometric module' that is transcended by the acquisition of spatial language at 6 years. This conclusion has been challenged, however, by findings that children as young as 18 months actually do use features to reorient in larger enclosures than those used in the original experiments. The reason for the room size effect is explored here in five experiments. Collectively, the data on age at which features are first used point to the importance of both restriction of movement in the small space and the fact that features are closer in the small space. In addition, success is seen at younger ages when the target object is adjacent to the feature. These results favor an adaptive combination model of spatial reorientation over a 'module-plus-language' view.

Prior data have revealed striking contrasts between 18- and 24-month-old children in place learning, an ability known to depend on the hippocampus (Newcombe, Huttenlocher, Drummey, & Wiley, 1998). The current research examined the development of three other basic abilities of mature spatial competence: the representation of multiple locations, the learning of relations among objects, and the recall of a single location after a substantial filled delay. Results indicated a transition from 18 to 24 months in all three abilities. This evidence supports a general transition in spatial representation that occurs towards the end of infancy. Existing neurobehavioral data suggest that a corresponding change in hippocampal functioning underlies this development.

Demonstrations of cognitive competence in preschool children and infants played an important role in the waning influence of Piagetian theory and the rise of nativism. Arguments and data favoring modularity have further buttressed the casefor nativism. This article reviews evidence concerning early competence and modularity in the spatial and quantitative domains, as well as the role of experience in development. This evidence provides little reason to support nativist claims in either domain.