My first thought was maybe the results would be different if the test was based on three things;(1) how the question was phrased, and (2) the mathematical understanding each individual in the test, (the mathematical understandings maybe relates to the way they were taught mathematics) or (3) maybe their spatial intelligence. (In the sense that Howard Gardner suggests in his book*, Frames of Mind.* )
I do not immediately see a direct link to how the brain, in general is wired and works. It seems to me that participants would respond in a way that reflects both the skills they were taught and which " way of knowing" they employed.
If I had been a participant, I would have used my sense of symmetry and flipped the 2 dimensional square over in my mind and then drawn the "twice as big" square, using my eye to duplicate the first square, rather than do any calculations. But that's just me and my brain. Does this suggest that the participant might not even need to calculate if the first square was drawn on graph paper?
I question if there is a way that can be identified as any one way that brains work in general.
It is interesting that so many participants created a 2 dimensional square 4 times the size and also makes me question why?
I wonder how the results would differ if the experiment went like this?
1. Draw a 2 dimensional square, then make it twice as big; and
2. Draw a 3 dimensional square, then make it twice as big.
I would find it interesting to see the results.
I do not know what you mean by MAB. Please enlighten me.
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 3:05 PM, ASAPANS <firstname.lastname@example.org>wrote:
> Do you agree with the idea the brain processes size by observed surface > area? > >