Abstract
Studies show that spatial interventions lead to improvements in mathematics. However, outcomes vary based on whether physical manipulatives (embodied action) are used during training. This study compares the effects of embodied and non-embodied spatial interventions on spatial and mathematics outcomes. The study has a randomized, controlled, pre-post, follow-up, training design (N = 182; mean age 8 years; 49% female; 83.5% White). We show that both embodied and non-embodied spatial training approaches improve spatial skills compared to control. However, we conclude that embodied spatial training using physical manipulatives leads to larger, more consistent gains in mathematics and greater depth of spatial processing than non-embodied training. These findings highlight the potential of spatial activities, particularly those that use physical materials, for improving children's mathematics skills.