ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Age effect analysis of different gender groups in spatial ability test based on virtual reality technology.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Differences in spatial cognitive performance and cognitive load between pilots and student pilots in virtual reality environments.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The objective of the present study was to examine the impact of age and cognitive autonomy across various gender categories. Moreover, this research seeks to delve into the dissociation of diverse spatial aptitude assessments, with the aim of elucidating the intricate mechanism underpinning spatial capability. Method: Based on virtual reality technology, this study conducted spatial ability tests on 312 volunteers, aged from 18 to 90 years old, including R-letter rotation test, S-M mental rotation, surface development test and maze test. Results: The analysis revealed that the spatial ability of men decreases with age, but the spatial ability of women between 28 and 37 years old is better than that of other age groups. Males outperformed females in most visual ability tests, but there was no significant difference in some age groups. There was no significant correlation between the R-letter rotation test and the S-M mental rotation test, and the two tests were independent. The relationship between visual ability and orientation ability is different in different spatial test indicators. Conclusion: This investigation further elucidates the dissimilarities in the age-related characteristics of spatial aptitude among diverse gender cohorts, as well as the autonomy of various spatial aptitude assessments. Such distinctions are instrumental in occupational preference for disparate groups, calling for comprehensive and meticulous inquiries into the maturation of spatial proficiency by researchers.
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.