A computerized spatial orientation test.

In three experiments, we compared performance on a paper-based perspective-taking task (the Spatial Orientation Test [SOT]; Hegarty & Waller, 2004) with performance on a computer-based version of the task. The computer-based version automates scoring angular errors, allows for different stimulus orders to be given to each participant, and allows for different testing time limits. In Experiment 1, the two media used different objects and mirror-image stimulus arrays in the two versions to mitigate the effects of memory for specific objects or responses. In Experiments 2 and 3, the two media used identical objects (also in a mirrored arrangement), to provide a more equivalent between-media comparison. We also substituted new objects for objects in the original version that had an inherent front/back (e.g., a car) and/or that were animate; directional or animate objects may add variance that is unrelated to perspective-taking ability. Experiment 3 used clarified instructions and a sample size sufficient to examine relatively small differences between the media as well as sex differences. Overall, the computer-based version produced performance that was similar to that of the paper-based version in terms of the rank-order of the participants. The new computer and paper versions of the SOT also had similar correlations with the Money Road Map test and the Santa Barbara Sense of Direction questionnaire, adding support to the claim that the computerized SOT is tapping into the same skill as the paper-based version. We provide a Java version of the new SOT, along with pdf files of instructions and practice stimuli, on the Open Science Framework website.