Spatial Abilities and Effect of Working Memory on Pictures of Objects Recognized from Haptic Perception
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective As a basis for an application in anatomy education, vision‐based spatial abilities tests have been correlated with pictures of objects recognized from haptic perception. Decreasing haptic perception while increasing working memory has been found to decrease performance on pictures of objects recognized from haptic perception. The objective of the current study was to correlate spatial abilities to the effect of working memory on pictures of objects recognized from haptic perception. Methods A cohort of 48 medical graduates was enrolled in a prospective study. Ethics committee approval and written informed concent were obtained. Spatial abilities were measured with a redrawn Vandenberg and Kuse Mental Rotations Tests in two (MRTA) and three (MRTC) dimensions and a Surface Development Test (SDT). In a one‐month rotation preparing for residency, the experiment was done within a one‐week drawing course before a one‐week applied anatomy course. Twenty‐five objects constructed from various shaped parts glued together were identified on a picture by participants after haptic perception. In the first exercice, participants could touch the object for up to two minutes while identifying the corresponding picture. In the second exercice, 30 seconds were allowed for haptic perception of the object, 15 seconds to memorize, and up to 75 seconds to identify the corresponding picture without any further haptic access to the object. The maximum score was 24 for each of MRTA and MRTC, 60 for SDT, and 25 for the picture score. Descriptive statistics included median and lower (Q1) and upper (Q3) quartiles. Spearman's correlation coefficient (and associated p‐value) was used to correlate the picture score to MRTA, MRTC and SDT scores. Results Correlations of change in picture score between the first and second exercice [6.5 (3, 10)] with MRTA [14 (9, 17)], MRTC [9.5 (6.5, 12)] and SDT [44.5 (36, 53)] scores were −0.046 (p = 0.7577), 0.126 (p = 0.3945) and 0.149 (p = 0.3133), respectively. Conclusion Haptics is involved in the handling of anatomical structures. Spatial abilities tests were not correlated to the effect of working memory on pictures of objects recognized from haptic perception. Spatial abilities tests have been correlated to the effect of working memory on drawings of objects from haptic perception. These findings may be explained by the 2‐D nature of picture recognition and 3‐D nature of making a perspective drawing of an object. Support or Funding Information This study was supported by an internal grant from the Department of Surgery, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada. This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".