SEX DIFFERENCES IN SPATIAL ABILITIES USING A DUAL CODING MODEL (SEQUENTIAL, SIMULTANEOUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING, COGNITION, STRATEGIES)

This study represents an initial attempt to demonstrate that sex differences in spatial and verbal abilities can be explained in terms of Paivio's dual coding model of information processing: i.e., in terms of variations in the nature of the task (concreteness of stimulus items), and time allowed for information processing to occur. Paivio's model describes three types of processing: simultaneous processing of nonverbal or "spatial" information, sequential processing of verbal information, and dual processing of information which lends itself to both types of coding. The study employed a modified version of Paivio's dual coding experiment. Four sets of stimuli (abstract words, nonnameable geometric forms, concrete pictures, and nameable geometric forms) were visually presented to small groups of 99 male and 106 female technical college students. Each set of ten stimulus items was presented at a fast and slow rate (5 fast and 5 slow). Each item was exposed for .6 seconds. At the fast rate there was an inter-item interval of .23 seconds, at the slow rate the interval was 3.5 seconds. After viewing each set of stimuli, subjects completed a free recall or recognition memory test. The data were analyzed using analyses of variance procedures and a priori contrast hypotheses were tested. The data involving the coding of purely verbal information produced the expected sex differences at the fast and combined rates. Data involving the processing of information which could be dually coded also produced sex differences in the expected direction. Data involving the coding of purely spatial information did not produce the expected sex differences. Thus, dual coding seems to provide an adequated model for explaining sex differences in the processing of "purely verbal" information. It also seems adequate for explaining sex differences in spatial abilities as long as verbal processing can occur. When the task does not permit verbal (sequential) encoding, dual coding seems insufficient to explain sex differences in processing. Implications of the results are discussed in terms of possible interventions to manipulate or eliminate sex differences.