The influence of the design of mental rotation trials on performance and possible differences between sexes: A theoretical review and experimental investigation.

IF 1.5 3区 心理学 Q4 PHYSIOLOGY Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-13 DOI:10.1177/17470218231200127
Leonardo Jost, Petra Jansen
{"title":"The influence of the design of mental rotation trials on performance and possible differences between sexes: A theoretical review and experimental investigation.","authors":"Leonardo Jost, Petra Jansen","doi":"10.1177/17470218231200127","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Sex differences in mental rotation performance are one of the largest in cognitive psychology. Men outperform women by up to 1 <i>SD</i> in psychometric mental rotation tests, but it is often neglected that there are no or only small sex differences for chronometric tests. As both tests are supposed to measure the same ability, we suspect some features of the tests themselves to affect sex differences in performance. Following a theoretical review of the test features, we evaluate the effects of the number of possible answer alternatives, whether they are presented as pairwise mirrored, and their interaction on sex differences in mental rotation performance. In an online experiment, 838 German-speaking participants, 421 women, 417 men, <i>M</i><sub>age</sub> =  42.58 (<i>SD</i> = 12.54) years, solved four blocks of mental rotation trials with two or eight alternatives, which were either pairwise mirrored or not. The results show that that the overall performance was lower for more alternatives and for mixed alternatives but not for their interaction. We could not determine explanations for sex differences as we did not observe meaningful sex differences at all. Possible reasons include the differences between men and women in age and education. This study suggests that the differences between tests affect performance. Sex differences, however, need more investigation, including possible effects and interactions of the test design, education, and age.</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"1250-1271"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11103899/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218231200127","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sex differences in mental rotation performance are one of the largest in cognitive psychology. Men outperform women by up to 1 SD in psychometric mental rotation tests, but it is often neglected that there are no or only small sex differences for chronometric tests. As both tests are supposed to measure the same ability, we suspect some features of the tests themselves to affect sex differences in performance. Following a theoretical review of the test features, we evaluate the effects of the number of possible answer alternatives, whether they are presented as pairwise mirrored, and their interaction on sex differences in mental rotation performance. In an online experiment, 838 German-speaking participants, 421 women, 417 men, Mage =  42.58 (SD = 12.54) years, solved four blocks of mental rotation trials with two or eight alternatives, which were either pairwise mirrored or not. The results show that that the overall performance was lower for more alternatives and for mixed alternatives but not for their interaction. We could not determine explanations for sex differences as we did not observe meaningful sex differences at all. Possible reasons include the differences between men and women in age and education. This study suggests that the differences between tests affect performance. Sex differences, however, need more investigation, including possible effects and interactions of the test design, education, and age.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
心理旋转试验的设计对表现的影响以及性别之间可能存在的差异:理论综述和实验研究。
心理旋转表现的性别差异是认知心理学中最大的差异之一。在心理测量心理旋转测试中,男性比女性高出1 SD,但人们经常忽视的是,在时间测量测试中没有或只有很小的性别差异。由于这两项测试都应该测量相同的能力,我们怀疑测试本身的一些特征会影响表现中的性别差异。在对测试特征进行理论回顾后,我们评估了可能的答案替代品的数量、它们是否以成对镜像的方式呈现,以及它们的相互作用对心理旋转表现中的性别差异的影响。在一项在线实验中,838名讲德语的参与者,421名女性,417名男性,Mage =  42.58(标准差 = 12.54)年,用两个或八个备选方案解决了四个心理旋转试验块,这些备选方案要么成对镜像,要么不镜像。结果表明,对于更多的替代品和混合的替代品,总体性能较低,但对于它们的相互作用则不然。我们无法确定性别差异的解释,因为我们根本没有观察到有意义的性别差异。可能的原因包括男女在年龄和教育方面的差异。这项研究表明,测试之间的差异会影响表现。然而,性别差异需要更多的调查,包括测试设计、教育和年龄可能产生的影响和相互作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
178
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling. QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form. The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.
期刊最新文献
Reasoning in social versus non-social domains and its relation to autistic traits. When is a causal illusion an illusion? Separating discriminability and bias in human contingency judgements. Advancing an account of hierarchical dual-task control: A focused review on abstract higher-level task representations in dual-task situations. The effect of chronic academic stress on attentional bias towards value-associated stimuli. Is the precedence of social re-orienting only inherent to the initiators?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1