↓ Skip to main content

The Connection Between Spatial and Mathematical Ability Across Development

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
219 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Connection Between Spatial and Mathematical Ability Across Development
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00755
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher J. Young, Susan C. Levine, Kelly S. Mix

Abstract

In this article, we review approaches to modeling a connection between spatial and mathematical thinking across development. We critically evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of factor analyses, meta-analyses, and experimental literatures. We examine those studies that set out to describe the nature and number of spatial and mathematical skills and specific connections between these abilities, especially those that included children as participants. We also find evidence of strong spatial-mathematical connections and transfer from spatial interventions to mathematical understanding. Finally, we map out the kinds of studies that could enhance our understanding of the mechanisms by which spatial and mathematical processing are connected and the principles by which mathematical outcomes could be enhanced through spatial training in educational settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 219 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 219 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 11%
Student > Bachelor 22 10%
Lecturer 20 9%
Student > Master 18 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 8%
Other 35 16%
Unknown 82 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 42 19%
Mathematics 26 12%
Social Sciences 25 11%
Arts and Humanities 8 4%
Computer Science 4 2%
Other 24 11%
Unknown 90 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 August 2022.
All research outputs
#4,243,137
of 23,146,350 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#7,196
of 30,630 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,764
of 329,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#240
of 659 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,146,350 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,630 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,990 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 659 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.