Psychological Bulletin © 2012 American Psychological Association 2013, Vol. 139, No. 2, 352–402 0033-2909/13/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0028446 The Malleability of Spatial Skills: A Meta-Analysis of Training Studies David H. Uttal, Nathaniel G. Meadow, Nora S. Newcombe Elizabeth Tipton, Linda L. Hand, Alison R. Alden, Temple University and Christopher Warren Northwestern University Having good spatial skills strongly predicts achievement and attainment in science, technology, engi- neering, and mathematics fields (e.g., Shea, Lubinski, & Benbow, 2001; Wai, Lubinski, & Benbow, 2009). Improving spatial skills is therefore of both theoretical and practical importance. To determine whether and to what extent training and experience can improve these skills, we meta-analyzed 217 research studies investigating the magnitude, moderators, durability, and generalizability of training on spatial skills. After eliminating outliers, the average effect size (Hedges’s g) for training relative to control was 0.47 (SE ϭ 0.04). Training effects were stable and were not affected by delays between training and posttesting. Training also transferred to other spatial tasks that were not directly trained. We analyzed the effects of several moderators, including the presence and type of control groups, sex, age, and type of training. Additionally, we included a theoretically motivated typology of spatial skills that emphasizes 2 dimensions: intrinsic versus extrinsic and static versus dynamic (Newcombe & Shipley, in press). Finally, we consider the potential educational and policy implications of directly training spatial skills. Considered together, the results suggest that spatially enriched education could pay substantial dividends in increasing participation in mathematics, science, and engineering. Keywords: spatial skills, training, meta-analysis, transfer, STEM The nature and extent of malleability are central questions in including reading (e.g., Rayner, Foorman, Perfetti, Pesetsky, & developmental and educational psychology (Bornstein, 1989). To Seidenberg, 2001), mathematics (e.g., U.S. Department of Educa- what extent can experience alter people’s abilities? Does the effect tion, 2008), and science and engineering (NRC, 2009). of experience change over time? Are there critical or sensitive This article develops this theme further, by focusing on the periods for influencing development? What are the origins and degree of malleability of a specific class of cognitive abilities: determinants of individual variation in response to environmental spatial skills. These skills are important for a variety of everyday input? Spirited debate on these matters is long-standing, and still tasks, including tool use and navigation. They also relate to an continues. However, there is renewed interest in malleability in important national problem: effective education in the science, behavioral and neuroscientific research on development (e.g., technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. M. H. Johnson, Munakata, & Gilmore, 2002; National Research Recent analyses have shown that spatial abilities uniquely predict Council [NRC], 2000; Stiles, 2008). Similarly, recent economic, STEM achievement and attainment. For example, in a long-term educational, and psychological research has focused on the capac- longitudinal study, using a nationally representative sample, Wai, ity of educational experiences to maximize human potential, re- Lubinski, and Benbow (2009) showed that spatial ability was a duce inequality (e.g., Duncan et al., 2007; Heckman & Masterov, significant predictor of achievement in STEM, even after holding 2007), and foster competence in a variety of school subjects, constant possible third variables such as mathematics and verbal skills (see also Humphreys, Lubinski, & Yao, 1993; Shea, Lubin- ski, & Benbow, 2001). This article was published Online First June 4, 2012. Efforts to improve STEM achievement by improving spatial David H. Uttal, Nathaniel G. Meadow, Elizabeth Tipton, Linda L. Hand, skills would thus seem logical. However, the success of this Alison R. Alden, and Christopher Warren, Department of Psychology, strategy is predicated on the assumption that spatial skills are Northwestern University; Nora S. Newcombe, Department of Psychology, Temple University. sufficiently malleable to make training effective and economically This work was supported by the Spatial Intelligence and Learning Center feasible. Some investigators have argued that training spatial per- (National Science Foundation Grant SBE0541957) and by the Institute for formance leads only to fleeting improvements, limited to cases in Education Sciences (U.S. Department of Education Grant R305H020088). which the trained task and outcome measures are very similar (e.g., We thank David B. Wilson, Larry Hedges, Loren M. Marulis, and Spyros Eliot, 1987; Eliot & Fralley, 1976; Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974; Sims Konstantopoulos for their help in designing and analyzing the meta- & Mayer, 2002). In fact, the NRC (2006) report, Learning to Think analysis. We also thank Greg Ericksson and Kate O’Doherty for assistance Spatially, questioned the generality of training effects and con- in coding and Kseniya Povod and Kate Bailey for assistance with refer- ences and proofreading. cluded that transfer of spatial improvements to untrained skills has Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to David H. not been convincingly demonstrated. The report called for research Uttal, Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, 2029 Sheridan aimed at determining how to improve spatial performance in a Road, Evanston, IL 60208-2710. E-mail: [email protected] generalizable way (NRC, 2006). 352 SPATIAL TRAINING META-ANALYSIS 353 Prior meta-analyses concerned with spatial ability did not focus Typology of Spatial Skills on the issue of how, and how much, training influences spatial thinking. Nor did they address the vital issues of durability and Ideally, a meta-analysis of the responsiveness of spatial skills to transfer of training. For example, Linn and Petersen (1985) con- training would begin with a precise definition of spatial ability and ducted a comprehensive meta-analysis of sex differences in spatial a clear breakdown of that ability into constituent factors or skills. skills, but they did not examine the effects of training. Closer to the It would also provide a clear explanation of perceptual and cog- issues at hand, Baenninger and Newcombe (1989) conducted a nitive processes or mechanisms that these different spatial factors meta-analysis aimed at determining whether training spatial skills demand or tap. The typology would allow for a specification of would reduce or eliminate sex differences in spatial reasoning. whether, how, and why the different skills do, or do not, respond However, Baenninger and Newcombe’s meta-analysis, which is to training of various types. Unfortunately, the definition of spatial ability is a matter of contention, and a comprehensive account of now quite dated, focused almost exclusively on sex differences. It the underlying processes is not currently available (Hegarty & ignored the fundamental questions of durability and transfer of Waller, 2005). training, although the need to further explore these issues was Prior attempts at defining and classifying spatial skills have highlighted in the Discussion section. mostly followed a psychometric approach. Research in this tradi- Given the new focus on the importance of spatial skills in STEM tion typically relies on exploratory factor analysis of the relations learning, the time is ripe for a comprehensive, systematic review of among items from different tests that researchers believe sample the responsiveness of spatial skills to training and experience. The from the domain of spatial abilities (e.g., Carroll, 1993; Eliot, present meta-analytic review examines the existing literature to 1987; Lohman, 1988; Thurstone, 1947). However, like most in- determine the size of spatial training effects, as well as whether telligence tests, tests of spatial ability did not grow out of a clear any such training effects are durable and whether they transfer to theoretical account or even a definition of spatial ability. Thus, it new tasks. Durability and transfer of training matter substantially. is not surprising that the exploratory factor approach has not led to For spatial training to be educationally relevant, its effects must consensus. Instead, it has identified a variety of distinct factors. endure longer than a few days, and must show at least some Agreement seems to be strongest for the existence of a skill often transfer to nontrained problems and tasks. Thus, examining these called spatial visualization, which involves the ability to imagine issues comprehensively may have a considerable impact on edu- and mentally transform spatial information. Support has been less cational policy and the continued development of spatial training consistent for other factors, such as spatial orientation, which interventions. Additionally, it may highlight areas that are as of yet involves the ability to imagine oneself or a configuration from underresearched and warrant further study. different perspectives (Hegarty & Waller, 2005). Like that of Baenninger and Newcombe (1989), the current Since a century of research on these topics has not led to a clear study examines sex differences in responsiveness to training. Re- consensus regarding the definition and subcomponents of spatial searchers