Sex differences persist in visuospatial mental rotation under 3D VR conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The classic Vandenberg and Kuse Mental Rotations Test (MRT) shows a male advantage for visuospatial rotation. However, MRTs that have been adapted for use with real or physical objects have found that sex differences are reduced or abolished. Previous work has also suggested that virtual 3D objects will eliminate sex differences, although this has not been demonstrated in a purely visuospatial paradigm without motor input. In the present study we sought to examine potential sex differences in mental rotation using a fully-immersive 3D VR adaptation of the original MRT that is purely visuospatial in nature. With unlimited time 23 females and 23 males completed a VR MRT designed to approximate the original Vandenberg and Kuse stimuli. Despite the immersive VR experience and lack of time pressure, we found a large male performance advantage in response accuracy, exceeding what has typically been reported for 2D MRTs. No sex differences were observed in response time. Thus, a male advantage in pure mental rotation for 2D stimuli can extend to 3D objects in VR, even when there are no time constraints.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".