ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Disciplinary trends in spatial concept associations: a multifaceted analysis of student responses.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study addresses a critical need to better understand how students conceptualize spatial knowledge across disciplinary contexts, a key issue for improving spatial thinking in education. Although spatial cognition has been widely studied, existing research predominantly relies on standardized performance-based assessments, which provide limited insight into how learners cognitively organize and associate spatial concepts across disciplines. This reveals a significant gap in capturing the conceptual and interdisciplinary dimensions of spatial understanding. Methods: To address this limitation, a stimulus-based word association task was administered to 417 middle school students in Türkiye, yielding 16,680 responses categorized into four disciplinary orientations: mathematics, geography, both, or neither. Reliability was established through expert coding and Fleiss' Kappa, and analyses included chi-square tests, principal component analysis, hierarchical clustering, and non-parametric comparisons. Results: The findings reveal systematic disciplinary patterns in students' conceptualizations: while slope, scale, and area are predominantly associated with mathematics, concepts such as coordinate, location, and graph function as interdisciplinary connectors. In contrast, environment and distance show weak disciplinary anchoring, suggesting more context-dependent interpretations. Significant differences were also observed across gender, transportation mode, and disciplinary orientation. Discussion: By introducing an associative-response approach, this study extends current spatial cognition research beyond performance-based measures and provides empirical evidence for discipline-oriented patterns in spatial thinking. The findings suggest that spatial cognition is not solely a domain-general ability but is shaped by educational experiences and disciplinary exposure, offering a refined conceptual perspective for understanding spatial intelligence in educational contexts.
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.