Is static spatial performance distinguishable from dynamic spatial performance? A latent-variable analysis.

There is disagreement among researchers about the distinction between dynamic and static spatial performance. Given that dynamic spatial performance is supposed to be important for some occupations, such as air traffic control (ATC), it is germane to have evidence about the likelihood of that distinction. In the present study, a battery of printed static spatial and reasoning tests were applied to 480 applicants for an ATC training course. Two dynamic spatial tests were also applied. Confirmatory factor analyses were performed for testing three models. In Model A, static and dynamic spatial tests were grouped, whereas in Model B, spatial tests were separated according to their static or dynamic character, and in Model C, spatial tests were segregated according to the construct they tapped (visualization or spatial relations). The authors found that Model B, which distinguished static and dynamic spatial tests, showed the best fit. They also discuss some implications of the findings.

Serie de tres términos y modelos de representación / Three -term series and representational models

El razonamiento permite sacar conclusiones a partir de una serie de percepciones, ideas o declaraciones. El razonamiento deductivo produce conclusiones válidas si las premisas son válidas. Algunas deducciones dependen del análisis de relaciones. Por ejemplo, "Ana es mejor que Petra: Julia es peor que Petra: ¿Quién es peor?". Los primeros estudios de laboratorio sugerían que las personas construyen diagramas mentales al razonar sobre este tipo de relaciones (modelo espacial), aunque el análisis lingüístico de las premisas de la serie también parecía poseer un papel relevante (modelo lingüístico ). Posteriormente se propusieron otros dos modelos, el micto y el de niveles, basados en el uso combinado de imágenes mentales y del análisis lingüístico. Según los procesos cognitivos postulados por los modelos señalados se predice el tiempo y la dificultad en la resolución de 32 series de tres términos con solución única, 16 de las cuales incluyen comparativas de superioridad y 16 de igualdad negada. En el presente estudio se calculan los tiempos de resolución y los niveles de dificultad asociados a las estructuras formales de esas 32 series, evaluando a una muestra de 980 personas. Para cada modelo se calcula un análisis de regresión para predecir los tiempos de resolución y los niveles de dificultad observados. Los resultados indican que el modelo espacial es el que mejor predice tanto el tiempo de resolución como el nivel de dificultad de las series. Este hallazgo contradice la investigación previamente publicada. Se discuten algunas implicaciones (AU)

Reasoning yields a conclusión from percepts, ideas, or assertions. Deduction yields valid conclusions if the premises are true. Some deductions depend on reasoning about relations. For example, «Anne is better than Sue: Julia is worse than Sue:: Who is worst?» Early laboratory studies suggested that reasoners construct mental diagrams (spatial model) although linguistic analyses are also involved (linguistic model). Two additional processing models were proposed some years later: the mixed and the levels of representation models. These models are based on a combination of mental images and linguistic processing. The processing time and the difficulty level of 32 three-term series of single solution (16 positive comparative and 16 negative equatives) are predicted from the specific cognitive processes postulated by the models. The present study assesses 980 participants to compute the processing time and the difficulty level of 32 three-term series. A regression analysis is computed to predict processing time and difficulty level. The spatial model is the better predictor of both processing time and difficulty level. This finding is the just opposite of the observed in previous research. Some implications are discussed (AU)