ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2023
Scaling up = scaling down? Children's spatial scaling in different perceptual modalities and scaling directions.
Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating canonical size phenomenon in drawing from memory task in different perceptual conditions among children.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Unpacking associations among children's spatial skills, mathematics, and arithmetic strategies: decomposition matters.Psychological research · 2024Article
- Adults' spatial scaling of tactile maps: Insights from studying sighted, early and late blind individuals.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study examined whether scaling direction and perceptual modality affect children's spatial scaling. Children aged 6-8 years (N = 201) were assigned to a visual, visuo-haptic, and haptic condition in which they were presented with colourful, embossed graphics. In the haptic condition, they were asked to wear a blindfold during the test trials. Across several trials, children were asked to learn about the position of a target in a map and to localize a disc at the same location in a referent space. Scaling factor was manipulated systematically, so that children had to either scale up or scale down spatial information. Their absolute deviations from the correct target location, reversal and signed errors, and response times served as dependent variables. Results revealed higher absolute deviations and response times for the haptic modality as opposed to the visual modality. Children's signed errors, however, showed similar response strategies across the perceptual conditions. Therefore, it seems that a functional equivalence between vision and touch seems to emerge slowly across development for spatial scaling. With respect to scaling directions, findings showed that absolute deviations were affected by scaling factors, with symmetric increases in scaling up and scaling down in the haptic condition. Conversely, children showed an unbalanced pattern in the visual conditions, with higher accuracy in scaling down as opposed to scaling up. Overall, our findings suggest that visibility seems to factor into children's scaling process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.