Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38248906›Full record

ReviewJournal of Intelligence2024

How Can We Best Assess Spatial Skills? Practical and Conceptual Challenges.

David H Uttal, Kiley McKee, Nina Simms, Mary Hegarty, Nora S Newcombe

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of Intelligence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
7.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Game-Based Assessment of Spatial Cognition Across a Wide Age Range.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Evaluating convergence between two data visualization literacy assessments.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

David H UttalDepartment of Psychology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7194-4370
Kiley McKeeDepartment of Psychology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208, USA.
Nina SimmsSpatial Intelligence and Learning Center, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208, USA.
Mary HegartyDepartment of Psychological & Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7777-8844
Nora S NewcombeDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19122, USA.
Northwestern University · USTemple University · USUniversity of California, Santa Barbara · US

Funding

National Science Foundation DRL-2135743
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spatial thinking skills are associated with performance, persistence, and achievement in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) school subjects. Because STEM knowledge and skills are integral to developing a well-trained workforce within and beyond STEM, spatial skills have become a major focus of cognitive, developmental, and educational research. However, these efforts are greatly hampered by the current lack of access to reliable, valid, and well-normed spatial tests. Although there are hundreds of spatial tests, they are often hard to access and use, and information about their psychometric properties is frequently lacking. Additional problems include (1) substantial disagreement about what different spatial tests measure-even two tests with similar names may measure very different constructs; (2) the inability to measure some STEM-relevant spatial skills by any existing tests; and (3) many tests only being available for specific age groups. The first part of this report delineates these problems, as documented in a series of structured and open-ended interviews and surveys with colleagues. The second part outlines a roadmap for addressing the problems. We present possibilities for developing shared testing systems that would allow researchers to test many participants through the internet. We discuss technological innovations, such as virtual reality, which could facilitate the testing of navigation and other spatial skills. Developing a bank of testing resources will empower researchers and educators to explore and support spatial thinking in their disciplines, as well as drive the development of a comprehensive and coherent theoretical understanding of spatial thinking.

Indexed as

assessment and measurementpsychometricsspatial cognition

Identifiers

PMID38248906
PMCPMC10816932
OpenAlexW4390918637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.