Individual differences in mental rotation: what does gesture tell us?

Göksun, Tilbe; Goldin‐Meadow, Susan; Newcombe, Nora S.; Shipley, Thomas F.

doi:10.1007/s10339-013-0549-1

Cited by 48 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 52 publications

(70 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…If manual exploration was permitted, even 6-month-olds showed increased looking time for impossible rotations in a habituation experiment ( Möhring & Frick, 2013 ). This motoric component was also found in adults who were low performers in the Vandenberg and Kuse (1978) test (redrawn version of Peters et al, 1995 ) as they would gesture more in their explanations regarding differences in the structure of a wooden 3D model of Shepard and Metzler’s cube aggregates ( Göksun, Goldin-Meadow, Newcombe, & Shipley, 2013 ).…”

Section: Developmental Differences In Mental Rotationmentioning

confidence: 86%

Keeping It in Three Dimensions: Measuring the Development of Mental Rotation in Children with the Rotated Colour Cube Test (RCCT)

Lütke

Lange-Küttner

2015

DEV

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study introduces the new Rotated Colour Cube Test (RCCT) as a measure of object identification and mental rotation using single 3D colour cube images in a matching-to-sample procedure. One hundred 7- to 11-year-old children were tested with aligned or rotated cube models, distracters and targets. While different orientations of distracters made the RCCT more difficult, different colours of distracters had the opposite effect and made the RCCT easier because colour facilitated clearer discrimination between target and distracters. Ten-year-olds performed significantly better than 7- to 8-year-olds. The RCCT significantly correlated with children’s performance on the Raven’s Coloured Progressive Matrices Test (RCPM) presumably due to the shared multiple-choice format, but the RCCT was easier, as it did not require sequencing. Children from families with a high socio-economic status performed best on both tests, with boys outperforming girls on the more difficult RCCT test sections.

show abstract

Section: Developmental Differences In Mental Rotationmentioning

confidence: 86%

Keeping It in Three Dimensions: Measuring the Development of Mental Rotation in Children with the Rotated Colour Cube Test (RCCT)

Lütke

Lange-Küttner

2015

DEV

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dynamic gestures, to review, are those that manually depict and transform an object. Researchers have identified the importance of dynamic gestures during mental rotation tasks (Göksun, Goldin-Meadow, Newcombe, & Shipley, 2013 ; Newcombe & Shipley, 2012 ; Uttal et al, 2012 ). Our usage of the term aligns best with Garcia and Infante’s ( 2012 ) characterization of gestures produced when solving calculus problems, as ‘moving the hands to describe the action that occurs in the problem or movements made to represent mathematical concepts’ (p. 290).…”

Section: A Gemc Theory Of Proof-with-insightmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grounded and embodied mathematical cognition: Promoting mathematical insight and proof using action and language

Nathan

Walkington

2017

Cogn. Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We develop a theory of grounded and embodied mathematical cognition (GEMC) that draws on action-cognition transduction for advancing understanding of how the body can support mathematical reasoning. GEMC proposes that participants’ actions serve as inputs capable of driving the cognition-action system toward associated cognitive states. This occurs through a process of transduction that promotes valuable mathematical insights by eliciting dynamic depictive gestures that enact spatio-temporal properties of mathematical entities. Our focus here is on pre-college geometry proof production. GEMC suggests that action alone can foster insight but is insufficient for valid proof production if action is not coordinated with language systems for propositionalizing general properties of objects and space. GEMC guides the design of a video game-based learning environment intended to promote students’ mathematical insights and informal proofs by eliciting dynamic gestures through in-game directed actions.GEMC generates several hypotheses that contribute to theories of embodied cognition and to the design of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education interventions. Pilot study results with a prototype video game tentatively support theory-based predictions regarding the role of dynamic gestures for fostering insight and proof-with-insight, and for the role of action coupled with language to promote proof-with-insight. But the pilot yields mixed results for deriving in-game interventions intended to elicit dynamic gesture production. Although our central purpose is an explication of GEMC theory and the role of action-cognition transduction, the theory-based video game design reveals the potential of GEMC to improve STEM education, and highlights the complex challenges of connecting embodiment research to education practices and learning environment design.

show abstract

“…Our definition of dynamic gestures focuses not on the presence or absence of movement of the hands (cf. Göksun, Goldin-Meadow, Newcombe, & Shipley, 2013;Uttal et al, 2012) but on the dynamic nature of what the gesture depicts (e.g., Garcia & Infante, 2012;Marghetis, Edwards, & Nuñez, 2014). The dynamic gesture and accompanying language identifies the proof in Figure 3 as transformational, whereas the language and nondynamic gestures in Figure 5 exemplify an invalid proof.…”

Section: -Mary's Conjecturementioning

confidence: 99%

What We Say and How We Do: Action, Gesture, and Language in Proving

Williams-Pierce¹,

Pier²,

Walkington³

et al. 2017

JRME

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this Brief Report, we share the main findings from our line of research into embodied cognition and proof activities. First, attending to students' gestures during proving activities can reveal aspects of mathematical thinking not apparent in their speech, and analyzing gestures after proof production can contribute significantly to our understanding of students' proving practices, particularly when attending to dynamic gestures depicting relationships that are difficult to communicate verbally. Second, directing students to produce physical actions before asking them to construct a mathematical proof has the potential to influence their subsequent reasoning in useful ways, as long as the directed actions have a relationship with the proof content that is clearly meaningful to the students. We discuss implications for assessment practices and teacher education, and we suggest directions for future research into embodied mathematical proof practices.

show abstract

Individual differences in mental rotation: what does gesture tell us?

Cited by 48 publications

References 52 publications

Keeping It in Three Dimensions: Measuring the Development of Mental Rotation in Children with the Rotated Colour Cube Test (RCCT)

Keeping It in Three Dimensions: Measuring the Development of Mental Rotation in Children with the Rotated Colour Cube Test (RCCT)

Grounded and embodied mathematical cognition: Promoting mathematical insight and proof using action and language

What We Say and How We Do: Action, Gesture, and Language in Proving

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About