Poster #11 - Spatial Perspective Taking in People with Down Syndrome

• In Event: Poster Session 05

Abstract

Introduction: The existing research has debated on whether spatial abilities represent a relative strength for people with Down syndrome (DS). Spatial perspective taking requires one to imagine adopting a position in space that is different from one’s own through mentally rotating oneself or an object to adopt a new perspective (Gunalp et al., 2019). As the angle of deviation increases between one’s current position and the imagined perspectives in perspective taking (PT) tasks, errors increase (Meneghetti et al., 2018). The current study examined PT in people with DS.

Methods: A total of 78 participants participated, and all the DS participants (n = 39) were matched on cognitive ability to their typically developing (TD) counterparts (n = 39) using the total score from the Raven’s-2 Progressive Matrices (Raven et al., 2018). Two tasks assessing PT taking were administered, including a Three Mountains Task and a Dog Task, modeled after Newcombe and Huttenlocher (1992) and Piaget and Inhelder (1956), respectively. The Dog Task had participants take the perspective of one of four toy dogs and determine which dog was farthest from them, on their left, and on their right. This task included angles at 0°, 90°, 180°, and 270°. The Three Mountains Task included more diverse angles in 45° increments, such as 145°. Both tasks were administered either online over zoom (n = 26) or in-person (n = 52).

Results: Results from the Dog Task indicate that DS participants performed worse overall than the cognitively matched TD group, which was marginally significant, F(1, 71) = 3.43, p = .068, η^2=.05. Further, cognitive ability, as measured by the Raven’s-2 Progressive Matrices, significantly predicted overall performance, F(1, 71) = 40.58, p < .001, η^2=.36. The TD group performed better on 180° trial relative to the 90° Right (p < .001) and 90° Left (p = .011) trials, whereas the DS group performed poorly across all three degrees (all p’s > .05). Results from the Three Mountains Task indicate that the TD group performed better than the DS group when administered online, F(1, 72) = 4.03, p = .048, η^2=.05, and no difference was found when the task was administered in-person (p < .05). Additionally, cognitive ability interacted with the angle of rotation on this task, F(4, 228) = 3.69, p = .011, η^2=.05. Although the increase of cognitive ability was associated with increased performance when no PT was needed, the relationship between the two disappeared when PT was needed (at angles other than 0°).

Conclusions: Results revealed that PT is overall difficult for both TD children aged 4-9 and for people with DS. People with DS also showed additional impairments in PT beyond their cognitive level. Implications of the results include informing future interventions and practice relating to the training of spatial abilities that affect daily activities such as independent living.

Authors

• Arielle Hershkovich, Montclair State University
  Presenting Author

• Daria Lasc, Montclair State University

• Sarah Shah, Montclair State University

• Sonia Conde, Montclair State University

• Aerin Holzli

• Yingying Yang, Montclair State University