2012
DOI: 10.2466/04.10.23.pms.114.2.627-640
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Exploratory Study of the Relations between Spatial Ability and Drawing from Memory

Abstract: Test scores of 119 students, attending either a public four-year college or a technical school, were related to their proportionality and detail drawing scores on the Memory for Designs Test. In regression models, the ETS Maze Tracing, Eliot-Price Mental Rotations, and Bender-Gestalt tests were consistent predictors of proportionality scores, with the latter two tests uniquely related to these. The ETS Shapes Memory Test and the Form Board Test were the strongest predictors for detail accuracy scores. The Shap… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 21 publications
(39 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Further support for VMM as a meaningful construct can be found in the wider literature. For example, it is known that visual memory skills predict the abilities of individuals who use drawing in a professional capacity to communicate ideassuch as college students of art [31] and technical drawing [32]. It is logical to suggest that the role for visual memory in drawing is analogous to the one we have identified for VMM within handwriting.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Further support for VMM as a meaningful construct can be found in the wider literature. For example, it is known that visual memory skills predict the abilities of individuals who use drawing in a professional capacity to communicate ideassuch as college students of art [31] and technical drawing [32]. It is logical to suggest that the role for visual memory in drawing is analogous to the one we have identified for VMM within handwriting.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%