Sex Differences in Mental Rotation Strategy

Slower but more accurate mental rotation performance in aphantasia linked to differences in cognitive strategies

Mental rotation tasks are frequently used as standard measures of mental imagery. However, aphantasia research has brought such use into question. Here, we assessed a large group of individuals who lack visual imagery (aphantasia) on two mental rotation tasks: a three-dimensional block-shape, and a human manikin rotation task. In both tasks, those with aphantasia had slower, but more accurate responses than controls. Both groups demonstrated classic linear increases in response time and error-rate as functions of angular disparity. In the three-dimensional block-shape rotation task, a within-group speed-accuracy trade-off was found in controls, whereas faster individuals in the aphantasia group were also more accurate. Control participants generally favoured using object-based mental rotation strategies, whereas those with aphantasia favoured analytic strategies. These results suggest that visual imagery is not crucial for successful performance in classical mental rotation tasks, as alternative strategies can be effectively utilised in the absence of holistic mental representations.

Are there Sex Differences in Confidence and Metacognitive Monitoring Accuracy for Everyday, Academic, and Psychometrically Measured Spatial Ability?

The current study evaluated sex differences in (1) self-perceptions of everyday and academic spatial ability, and (2) metacognitive monitoring accuracy for measures of spatial visualization and spatial orientation. Undergraduate students completed the Paper Folding Test, Spatial Relations Test, and the Revised Purdue Spatial Visualization Test while making confidence judgments (CJs) for each trial. They also made global estimates of performance and rated their ability to perform several everyday and academic spatial scenarios. Across multiple spatial measures, female students displayed lower confidence in their item-level monitoring and global assessments of performance than did male students, even when no actual differences in spatial performance occurred. Women were also less confident in their self-assessments of their visualspatial ability for scientific domains than were men. However, the absolute and relative accuracy of CJs did not differ as a function of sex suggesting that women can monitor their spatial performance as well as men.