The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Spatial learning disabilities and underachievement among university anatomy students
Abstract
Summary. In this study the relationship between underachievement in anatomy and spatial ability (both geometrical and anatomical) is investigated. Subjects were second‐year medical students at the University of Cape Town from 1980 to 1983. Geometrical spatial ability was measured using a battery of three‐dimensional exercises involving the sectioning, joining, translation, rotation and visualization of simple solid objects. Anatomical spatial achievement was measured using university practical examination scores of April, June and October, as well as students' scores on those items in the April, June and November MCQ anatomy examinations which were classified as spatially three‐dimensional by a panel of lecturers in anatomy. Non‐spatial anatomical achievement was measured using the university essay examination scores of April, June and November, together with students' scores on the non‐spatial items in the MCQ anatomy examinations. From 1980 to 1983 it was found that students who failed the battery of geometrical spatial exercises and/or recorded large, persistent deficits on spatial MCQs relative to non‐spatial MCQs, scored significantly lower marks in practical anatomy examinations throughout the year than those students who scored well in the battery of geometrical spatial exercises. Spatially competent and spatially inept students performed equally well on the non‐spatial MCQs and the non‐spatial essay examinations. Borderline and failing students recorded the greatest deficits in anatomical spatial scores (for whom losses of approximately 18% occurred in practical examinations in anatomy). Since potential failures with persistent spatial handicaps can be readily identified by mid‐year, a programme of differentiated teaching methods is recommended for these students.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
How medical students learn spatial anatomy
Garg, A. X., Norman, G., & Sperotable, L. (2001) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)03649-7 · Cited by 351
The relative effectiveness of computer‐based and traditional resources for education in anatomy
Khot, Z., Quinlan, K., Norman, G. R., & Wainman, B. (2013) · Anatomical Sciences Education · doi:10.1002/ase.1355 · Cited by 274
Metadata
- Authors
- ROCHFORD, K.
- Venue
- Medical Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1985-01
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 13-26
- ISSN
- 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2923
- OpenAlex
- W2021461331
- Cited by
- 159
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Spatial learning disabilities and underachievement among university anatomy students. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1985.tb01134.x
- The paper
- ROCHFORD, K. (1985). Spatial learning disabilities and underachievement among university anatomy students. Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1985.tb01134.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.