Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T14:36:35.168Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of pattern type on children's block design performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2009

Natacha A. Akshoomoff  and
Joan Stiles
Natacha A. Akshoomoff
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0109
Joan Stiles
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0109
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study sought to determine what factors contribute to normal developmental changes in performance on the block design task. The target models were systematically varied to emphasize global, intermediate, and local pattern structures. One hundred children between 4.5 and 9 years of age were tested in the first experiment. Correct performance and error types differed significantly as a function of age and pattern type. Broken configuration errors were particularly common for the global patterns. In the second experiment, 48 children between 4.5 and 8 years of age were tested using designs with a superimposed grid (cued condition). Error rates were lower in the cued condition and broken configuration errors were less frequent. These results suggest that children have more difficulty parsing more cohesive patterns, but they can modify their strategies when the square matrix is provided by the pattern structure. (JINS, 1996, 2, 392–402.)

Keywords

DevelopmentVisuospatial processingSpatial analysis
Type
Research Articles
Information
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 2 , Issue 5 , September 1996 , pp. 392 - 402
Copyright
Copyright © The International Neuropsychological Society 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Akshoomoff, N.A., Delis, D.C., & Kiefner, M.G. (1989). Block constructions of chronic alcoholic and unilateral brain-damaged patients: A test of the right-hemisphere hypothesis. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 4, 275–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akshoomoff, N.A. & Stiles, J. (1995). Developmental trends in visuospatial analysis and planning: I. Copying a complex figure. Neuropsychology, 9, 364–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akshoomoff, N.A. & Stiles, J. (in preparation). Block design performance in children with early unilateral brain injury.Google Scholar
American Psychological Association. (1992). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 47, 1597–1611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, R.S. & Torgesen, J.K. (1981). Analysis of behaviors involved in performance of the Block Design Subtest of the WISC-R. Intelligence, 5, 321–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, E. (1983). Process and achievement revisited. In Wapner, S. & Kaplan, B. (Eds.), Toward a holistic developmental psychology (pp.143–156). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Kaplan, E., Fein, D., Delis, D., Morris, R., & Kramer, J. (1995). The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-III as a neuropsychological instrument (WISC-III-NI, pilot version). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Kaplan, E., Fein, D., Morris, R., & Delis, D. (1991). WA1S-R as a neuropsychological instrument. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Kiernan, R.J., Bower, G.H., & Schorr, D. (1984). Stimulus variables in the Block Design Task revisited: A reply to Royer. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 52, 705–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohs, S.C. (1923). Intelligence measurement: A psychological and statistical study based upon the block-design tests. New York: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kramer, J.H., Kaplan, E., Blusewicz, M.J., & Preston, K.A. (1991). Visual hierarchical analysis of block design configural errors. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 13, 455–465.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lezak, M.D. (1995). Neuropsychological assessment (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Moses, P. & Stiles, J. (1995). The effect of variation in conceptual context on children's analysis of geometric forms. Submitted.Google Scholar
Navon, D. (1977). Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 353–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Odom, R.D. & Cook, G.L. (1984). Perceptual sensitivity, integral perception, and the similarity classifications of preschool children and adults. Developmental Psychology 20, 560–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, S.E. (1977). Hierarchical structure in perceptual representation. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 441–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, L.C. & Delis, D.C. (1986). ‘Part-whole’ processing in unilateral brain-damaged patients: Dysfunction of hierarchical organization. Neuropsychologia, 24, 363–370.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robertson, L.C. & Lamb, M.R. (1991). Neuropsychological contributions to theories of part/whole organization. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 299–330.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Royer, F.L. (1977). Information processing in the block design task. Intelligence, 1, 32–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Royer, F.L. & Weitzel, K.E. (1977). Effect of perceptual cohesiveness on pattern recoding in the block design task. Perception and Psychophysics, 21, 39–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sattler, J.M. (1992). Assessment of children: Revised and updated third edition. San Diego: Jerome M. Sattler Publisher.Google Scholar
Schorr, D., Bower, G.H., & Kiernan, R. (1982). Stimulus variables in the block design task. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 50, 479–487.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spelberg, H.C.L. (1987). Problem-solving strategies on the block design task. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 65, 99–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stiles, J., Stern, C., Trauner, D., & Nass, R. (in press). Developmental change in spatial grouping activity among children with early focal brain injury: Evidence from a modeling task. Brain and Cognition.Google Scholar
Tada, W.L. & Stiles, J. (in press). Developmental change in children's analysis of spatial patterns. Developmental Psychology.Google Scholar
Tada, W. & Stiles-Davis, J. (1989). Children's analysis of spatial patterns: An assessment of their “errors” in copying geometric forms. Cognitive Development, 4, 177–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waber, D. (1989). The biological boundaries of cognitive styles: A neuropsychological analysis. In Globerson, T. & Zelniker, T. (Eds.), Cognitive style and cognitive development (pp. 11–35). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
Ward, T.B. (1988). When is category learning holistic? A reply to Kemler Nelson. Memory and Cognition, 16, 85–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, T.B. & Scott, J. (1987). Analytic and holistic modes of learning family-resemblance concepts. Memory and Cognition, 15, 42–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wechsler, D. (1974). Manual for the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised. New York: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (1991). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar