Hands-On: Investigating the role of physical manipulatives in spatial training
Katie Anne Gilligan-Lee, Zachary Hawes, Ashley Y. Williams, Emily K. Farran, Kelly S. Mix
Abstract
Open-access reader
Katie Anne Gilligan-Lee, Zachary Hawes, Ashley Y. Williams, Emily K. Farran, Kelly S. Mix
Abstract
Open-access reader
Studies show that spatial interventions lead to improvements in mathematics. However, outcomes vary based on whether physical manipulatives (embodied action) are used during training. This study compares the effects of embodied and non-embodied spatial interventions on spatial and mathematics outcomes. The study has a randomized, controlled, pre-post, follow-up, training design (N = 182; mean age 8 years; 49% female; 83.5% White). We show that both embodied and non-embodied spatial training approaches improve spatial skills compared to control. However, we conclude that embodied spatial training using physical manipulatives leads to larger, more consistent gains in mathematics and greater depth of spatial processing than non-embodied training. These findings highlight the potential of spatial activities, particularly those that use physical materials, for improving children's mathematics skills.
OpenAlex reports 22 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Studies show that spatial interventions lead to improvements in mathematics. However, outcomes vary based on whether physical manipulatives (embodied action) are used during training. This study compares the effects of embodied and non-embodied spatial interventions on spatial and mathematics outcomes. The study has a randomized, controlled, pre-post, follow-up, training design (N = 182; mean age 8 years; 49% female; 83.5% White). We show that both embodied and non-embodied spatial training approaches improve spatial skills compared to control. However, we conclude that embodied spatial training using physical manipulatives leads to larger, more consistent gains in mathematics and greater depth of spatial processing than non-embodied training. These findings highlight the potential of spatial activities, particularly those that use physical materials, for improving children's mathematics skills.
Key concepts: Embodied cognition, Spatial ability, Psychology, Psychological intervention, Spatial learning, Training (meteorology), Action (physics), Mathematics education