Evaluation of the relationship between spatial abilities and anatomy learning

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between the spatial abilities of medical school students and their learning in anatomy. Methods: The spatial abilities of the 120 students (74 females, 46 males) were examined using Mental Rotation Test (MRT). The relationship between the mental rotation scores and the mean scores of their practical and theoretical anatomy examinations was determined in terms of gender. Results: The study revealed that mental rotation skills of female participants were lower than males; however, there was no significant difference in their exam (theoretical and practical anatomy examinations) scores in terms of gender. The spatial ability of the students had a low level significant effect on their anatomy scores, regarding practical applications. Conclusion: The results of the study revealed a significant relationship between students’ spatial ability and their success in practical anatomy examinations. This suggests that improving spatial ability skills may have a significant contribution to practical anatomy learning and may be considered as a part of anatomy education.

Keywords

• anatomy learning
• gender
• spatial ability

References

1. Garg AX, Norman, G, Sperotable L. How medical students learn spatial anatomy. Lancet 2001;357:363–4.
2. Hoyek N, Collet C, Rastello O, Fargier P, Thiriet P, Guillot A. Enhancement of mental rotation abilities and its effect on anatomy learning. Teach Learn Med 2009;21:201–6.
3. Hoyek N, Collet C, Di Rienzo F, De Almeida M, Guillot A. Effectiveness of three-dimensional digital animation in teaching human anatomy in an authentic classroom context. Anat Sci Educ 2014;7:430–7.
4. Lohman DF. Spatial ability: a review and reanalysis of the correlational literature. 1st ed. Technical report no.8, Aptitude research project, School of Education, Stanford University. Office of Naval Research and Advanced Research Projects Agency, 1979. p188.
5. McGee MG. Human spatial abilities: psychometric studies and environmental, genetic, hormonal, and neurological influences. Psychol Bull 1979;86:889–918.
6. Feng J, Spence I, Pratt J. Playing an action video game reduces gender differences in spatial cognition. Psychol Sci 2007;18:850–5.
7. Hegarty M, Keehner M, Khooshabeh P, Montello DR. How spatial abilities enhance, and are enhanced by, dental education. Learning and Individual Differences 2009;19:61–70.
8. Nilsson T, Hedman L, Ahlqvist J. Visual spatial ability and interpretation of three dimensional information in radiographs. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2007;36:86–91.

9. Luursema J-M, Vervey WB, Kommers PA, Geelkerken RH, Vos HJ. Optimizing conditions for computer assisted anatomical learning. Interacting with Computers 2006;18:1123–38.
10. Schlickum M, Hedman L, Enochsson L, Henningsohn L, Kjellin A, Fellander-Tsai L. Surgical simulation tasks challenge visual working memory and visual-spatial ability differently. World J Surg 2011;35:710–5.
11. Khot Z, Quinlan K, Norman GR, Wainman B. The relative effectiveness of computer-based and traditional resources for education in anatomy. Anat Sci Educ 2013;6:211–5.
12. Langlois J, Bellemare C, Toulouse J, Wells GA. Spatial abilities training in anatomy education: a systematic review. Anat Sci Educ 2020;13:71–9.
13. Nguyen N, Mulla A, Nelson AJ, Wilson TD. Visuospatial anatomy comprehension: the role of spatial visualization ability and problem solving strategies. Anat Sci Educ 2014;7:280–8.
14. Vorstenbosch MA, Klaassen TP, Donders AR, Kooloos JG, Bolhuis SM, Laan RF. Learning anatomy enhances spatial ability. Anat Sci Educ 2013;6:257–62.
15. Pedersen K. Supporting students with varied spatial reasoning abilities in the anatomy classroom. Teaching Innovation Projects 2012;2:1–6.
16. Hegarty M, Keehner M, Cohen C, Montello Y, Lippa Y. The role of spatial cognition in medicine: applications for selecting and training professionals. In: Allen GL, editor. Applied spatial cognition from research to cognitive technology. 1st ed. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2007. p. 285–315.
17. Langlois J, Wells GA, Lecourtois M, Bergeron G, Yetisir E, Martin M. Sex differences in spatial abilities of medical graduates entering their residency programs. Anat Sci Educ 2013;6:368–75.
18. Losco CD, Grant WD, Armson A, Meyer AJ, Walker BF. Effective methods of teaching and learning in anatomy as a basic science: a BEEM systematic review: BEME guide no. 44. Med Teach 2017;39:234–43.
19. Lufler RS, Zumwalt AC, Romney CA, Hoagland TM. Effect of visual spatial ability on medical students’ performance in a gross anatomy course. Anat Sci Educ 2012;5:3–9.
20. Maeda Y, Yoon SY. A meta analysis on gender differences in mental rotation ability measured by the Purdue spatial visualization tests: visualization of rotations (PSVT: R). Educ Psychol Rev 2013;25:69– 94.
21. Peters M, Manning JT, Reimers S. The effects of sex, sexual orientation, and digit ratio (2D:4D) on mental rotation performance. Arch Sex Behav 2007;36:251–260.
22. Yammine K, Violato C. A meta analysis of the educational effectiveness of three dimensional visualization technologies in teaching anatomy. Anat Sci Educ 2015;8:525–38.
23. Langlois J, Bellemare C, Toulouse J, Wells G. Spatial abilities and anatomy knowledge assessment: a systematic review. Anat Sci Educ 2017;10:235–41.
24. Linn MC, Petersen AC. Emergence and characterization of sex differences in spatial ability: a meta analysis. Child Dev 1985;56:1479– 98.
25. Vandenberg SG, Kuse AR. Mental rotations, a group test of threedimensional spatial visualization. Percept Mot Skills 1978;47:599– 604.
26. Yıldız B, Tüzün H. Effects of using three-dimensional virtual environments and concrete manipulatives on spatial ability. [Article in Turkish] Hacettepe University Journal of Education 2011;41;498– 508.
27. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1988. p. 20–27.
28. Gonzales RA, Ferns G, Vorstenbosch MA, Smith CF. Does spatial awareness training affect anatomy learning in medical students? Anat Sci Educ 2020;13:1–14.
29. Sagoo MG, Smith CF, Gosden E. Assessment of anatomical knowledge by practical examinations: the effect of question design on student performance. Anat Sci Educ 2016;9:446–52.
30. Gradl-Dietsch G, Korden T, Modabber A, Sönmez TT, Stromps JP, Ganse B, Knobe M. Multidimensional approach to teaching anatomy: do gender and learning style matter? Ann Anat 2016;208: 158–64.
31. Meyer AJ, Innes SI, Stomski NJ, Armson AJ. Student performance on practical gross anatomy examinations is not affected by assessment modality. Anat Sci Educ 2016;9:111–120.
32. Hisley KC, Anderson LD, Smith SE, Kavic SM, Tracy JK. Coupled physical and digital cadaver dissection followed by a visual test protocol provides insights into the nature of anatomical knowledge and its evaluation. Anat Sci Educ 2008;1:27–40.
33. Abdel Meguid EM, Smith CF, Meyer AJ. Examining the motivation of health profession students to study human anatomy. Anat Sci Educ 2020;13:343–52.
34. Smith CF, Mathias H. An investigation into medical students’ approaches to anatomy learning in a systems-based prosection course. Clin Anat 2007;20:843–8.
35. Ward PJ. First year medical students’ approaches to study and their outcomes in a gross anatomy course. Clin Anat 2011;24:120–7.
36. Voyer D, Voyer S, Bryden MP. Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: a meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. Psychol Bull 1995;117:250–70.
37. Gutierrez JC, Holladay SD, Arzi B, Gomez M, Pollard R, Youngblood P, Srivastava S. Entry level spatial and general non-verbal reasoning: can these abilities be used as a predictor for anatomy performance in veterinary medical students? Front Vet Sci 2018;5:226.
38. Parsons TD, Larson P, Kratz K, Thiebaux M, Bluestein B, Buckwalter JG, Rizzo AA. Sex differences in mental rotation and spatial rotation in a virtual environment. Neuropsychologia 2004;42: 555–62.
39. Garg A, Norman G, Spero L, Taylor I. Learning anatomy: do new computer models improve spatial understanding? Medical Teacher 1999;21:519–22.
40. Langlois J, Wells GA, Lecourtois M, Bergeron G, Yetisir E, Martin M. Sex differences in spatial abilities of medical graduates entering residency programs. Anat Sci Educ 2013;6:368–75.
41. Langlois J, Bellemare C, Toulouse J, Wells GA. Spatial abilities training in anatomy education: a systematic review. Anat Sci Educ 2020;13:71–9.
42. Sorby S, Nevin E, Behan A, Mageean E, Sheridan S. Spatial skills as predictors of success in first-year engineering. In: Proceedings 44th Annual Frontiers in Education (FIE) Conference, 22–25 October Madrid, Spain; 2014. p. 111–7.
43. Reilly D, Neumann DL. Gender role differences in spatial ability: A meta analytic review. Sex Roles 2013;68:521–35.
44. Öktem H, fiençelikel T, Akçiçek E, Koçyiğit A, Penekli U, Sungur S, Tanrıyakul B, Ulusoy B. Contribution of 3D modeling to anatomy education: a pilot study. Anatomy 2019;13:116–21.
45. Sweeney K, Hayes JA, Chiavaroli N. Does spatial ability help the learning of anatomy in a biomedical science course? Anat Sci Educ 2014;7:289–94.
46. Pahuta MA, Schemitsch EH, Backstein D, Papp S, Gofton W. Virtual fracture carving improves understanding of a complex fracture: A randomized controlled study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012:94; 182.
47. Bogomolova K, Hierck BP, Hage JA, Hovius SE. Anatomy dissection course improves the initially lower levels of visual spatial abilities of medical undergraduates. Anat Sci Educ 2020;13:333–42.
48. Luursema JM, Vorstenbosch M, Kooloos J. Stereopsis, visuospatial ability, and virtual reality in anatomy learning. Anat Res Int 2017; 2017:1493135.
49. Inuwa IM, Taranikanti V, Al?Rawahy M, Habbal O. Anatomy practical examinations: how does student performance on computerized evaluation compare with the traditional format? Anat Sci Educ 2012; 5:27–32.