| Title |
Self-reported craft expertise predicts maintenance of spatial ability in old age
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cognitive Processing, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10339-013-0596-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shannon K. T. Bailey, Valerie K. Sims |
| Abstract |
Three hundred and three female participants between the ages of 18 and 77 reported their experience in crafting (sewing, knitting, and crocheting) and completed a measure of spatial ability: The Paper Folding Test. To investigate the connection between spatial ability performance, age, and craft expertise, an ANOVA was conducted for the Paper Folding Test using two levels of crafting expertise (High and Low) and three age categories (younger adults: 18-39, middle-aged adults: 40-59, and older adults: 60-77). Performance on the spatial ability test declined with age as predicted from previous literature. However, there was a significant Age by Expertise interaction. No difference was found between High and Low craft expertise groups in younger adults (18-39), but there was a growing difference between expertise groups in middle-aged adults (40-59) and older adults (60-77). The results suggest that continued hands-on experience in spatial domains is a predictor of maintenance of spatial ability across the life span. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 23% |
| Professor | 4 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 6 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 18% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 18% |
| Unknown | 5 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 February 2014.
All research outputs
#18,370,767
of 22,753,345 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive Processing
#246
of 337 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#229,130
of 304,917 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive Processing
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,753,345 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 337 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 304,917 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.