Spatial Ability Subfactors and Their Influences on a Computer-Based Information Search Task

Abstract

Objective: The present study examined the relationship between two distinct subfactors of spatial ability and performance in an information search task modeled on browsing the Web. Background: Previous studies have found relationships between various measures of spatial ability and performance in a wide variety of computerbased tasks. Method: In the search task 101 participants (18-29 years of age) searched for the answer to a question by navigating the system. They completed the experimental task as well as a battery of cognitive ability measures that included two different measures of spatial ability. Results: The results indicate that spatial orientation ability was related to performance with tasks that were high in their navigational requirement (engendered by the use of a novel aid), whereas spatial visualization was unrelated to performance in any task condition. Conclusion: A closer inspection of the cognitive requirements of a task may reveal what interventions could be most useful when designing computer systems or developing training programs. Application: Given the unique differences between the different spatial abilities, the current results suggest the design of navigational aids that place less demand on spatial orientation ability. Date received: March 4, 2004 Date accepted: December 27, 2004

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ackerman, P. L. (1988). Determinants of individual differences during skill acquisition: Cognitive abilities and information processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 288–318.

Campagnoni, F. R. , & Ehrlich, K. (1989). Information retrieval using a hypertext-based help system. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 7, 271–291.

Cohen, J. , & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Czaja, S. J. , Charness, N. , Fisk, A. D. , Hertzog, C. , Nair, S. N. , Rogers, W. A. , & Sharit, J. (in press). Factors predicting the use of technology: Findings from the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psychology and Aging.

Czaja, S. J. , Charness, N. , Fisk, A. D. , Rogers, W. , & Sharit, J. (2001). The center for research and education on aging and technology enhancement: A program for enhancing technology for older adults. Gerontology, 1, 50–59.

Dyck, J. L. , & Smither, J. A. (1994). Age differences in computer anxiety: The role of computer experience, gender and education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 10, 239–248.

Ekstrom, R. B. , French, J. W. , Harman, H. H. , & Dermen, D. (1976). Manual for kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Garfein, A. J. , Schaie, K. W. , & Willis, S. L. (1988). Microcomputer proficiency in later-middle-aged and older adults: Teaching old dogs new tricks. Social Behavior, 3(2), 131–148.

Gomez, L. M. , Egan, D. E. , & Bowers, C. (1986). Learning to use a text editor: Some learner characteristics that predict success. Human Computer Interaction, 2, 1–23.

10.

Gomez, L. M. , Egan, D. E. , Wheeler, E. A. , Sharma, D. K. , & Gruchacz, A. M. (1983). How interface design determines who has difficulty learning to use a text editor. In Proceedings of ACM CHI'83 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 176–181). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.

11.

Jennings, F. , Benyon, D. , & Murray, D. (1991). Adapting systems to differences between individuals. Acta Psychologica, 78, 243–256.

12.

Kieras, D. E. , & Bovair, S. (1984). The role of a mental model in learning to operate a device. Cognitive Science, 8, 255–273.

13.

Kozhevnikov, M. , & Hegarty, M. (2001). A dissociation between object manipulation spatial ability and spatial orientation ability. Memory and Cognition, 29, 745–756.

14.

Pak, R. (2001a). A further examination of the influence of spatial abilities on computer task performance in younger and older adults. Unpublished master's thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.

15.

Pak, R. (2001b). A further investigation of spatial abilities and computer-based task performance in younger and older adults. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 44th Annual Meeting (pp. 1551–1555). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

16.

Pellegrino, J. W. , Alderton, D. L. , & Shute, V. J. (1984). Understanding spatial ability. Educational Psychologist, 19, 239–253.

17.

Pfeiffer, R. I. (1975). A short portable mental status questionnaire for the assessment of organic brain deficit in elderly patients. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 23, 433–441.

18.

Seagull, F. J. , & Walker, N. (1992). The effects of hierarchical structure and visualization ability on computerized information retrieval. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 4, 369–385.

19.

Sebrechts, M. M. , Deck, J. G. , Wagner, R. K. , & Black, J. B. (1984). How human abilities affect component skills in word processing. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 16, 234–237.

20.

Vicente, K. J. , Hayes, B. C. , & Williges, R. C. (1987). Assaying and isolating individual differences in searching a hierarchical files system. Human Factors, 29, 349–359.

21.

Vicente, K. J. , & Williges, R. C. (1988). Accommodating individual differences in searching a hierarchical file system. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 29, 647–668.

22.

Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler Memory Scale III (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.

23.

Westerman, S. J. (1997). Individual differences in the use of command line and menu computer interfaces. International Journal of Human- Computer Interaction, 9, 183–198.

24.

Wochinger, K. , & Boehm-Davis, D. (1995). The effects of age, spatial ability, and navigational information on navigational performance (FHA Publication No. FHWA-RD-95166). McLean, VA: U.S. Department of Transportation.