|
We will start with some formal definitions of what is
cognitive style about. Do not bother if you do not catch immediately the
meaning of this concept. Certainly, you will feel more comfortable with
this at the end of the unit.
The term cognitive style is associated with stable, traitlike
consistency in personal approach to attending, perceiving, and thinking.
Or, cognitive styles are particular personality determined modes of perceiving,
remembering, thinking, and problem solving. Another definition - cognitive
styles represent stable traits that distinguish the learners according
to consistencies in interacting with environment. Cognitive styles might
be understood better by comparing them to construct of cognitive ability
within a dichotomy based conceptual framework.
Content and level of cognition versus Mode of cognition
Intellectual ability refers to content and level of cognition
(What? and How much?). Cognitive style reflects manner or mode of cognition
(How?).
Unipolarity versus Bipolarity
Ability is a unipolar construct. High amounts of ability
are always preferable. There is not enough theoretical and empirical ground
to insists that one pole of particular cognitive style is a better that
another one.
Particular domain versus Cut across domains
Ability is a specific for a particular domain of content
or functions (verbal, numerical, spatial, or memory). Cognitive style
cut across content and functions.
Product-oriented versus Process oriented
Cognitive abilities are product oriented with the emphasis
put on the speed and the accuracy of responses while cognitive styles
are process oriented with the emphasis put on the typical patterns of
psychological functions and processes.
back to top
Short descriptions of the most referred cognitive styles
Field
Dependence - Field Independence
Field
dependence/independence refers to the extent to which a learner perception
is influenced by environment or context (Witkin, Moore, Goodenough &
Cox). Field dependent students experience difficulties to find the information
they are looking for because other contextual stimuli tend to impede it.
Field independent learners easy distinguish the relevant information from
surrounding it components. Field independents are more likely to create
their own models when trying to understand a perceived field. The field
dependants are more fixed to the explanation format that has been proposed
and have a tendency to accept information without restructuring
and reorganizing it. In summary, field dependants prefer more structured
learning environment with well-organised material, while field independents
prefer a learning context with a minimal direction and maximum resources.
Serialist - Holist
Holist/Serialist cognitive style has been defined according
to the two different ways of selecting and organising information in learning
complex subject matter: building an overview of the topic itself or building
concrete operations (Pask). Holist prefers a global approach to a material
using broad descriptions. She/he tends to relate everything with everything
in a complex multilevel information structure. This is a hypotheses-driven
style. Serialist uses step-by-step approach focused on details and procedures.
This is a data-driven style.
Impulsivity -
Reflectivity
Impulsivity/Reflectivity distinguishes the people according
to the tendency of postponing initial response and reflecting on it before
answering rather than the tendency of quick, impulsive response (Kagan).
Impulsive people, by rule, respond faster and make more mistakes, while
reflectors answer slower but commit fewer performance errors. Reflective
people tend to analyse the information and generate several alternatives
before going to implementation. Impulsive people go straightway to implementation
of the first idea that has come in mind.
Verbiliser - Visualiser
Verbaliser /Visualiseer cognitive style measures the
preference of people to attend and organise visual or verbal information
(Kirby, Moore & Schofield). Some people learn better from diagrams,
graphics and pictures, while others prefer to process information by reading
or listening. The immediate educational implication of the empirical research
on this cognitive style is the deliberate attempt to build a learning
environment with both visual and verbal stimuli.
Some additional information about cognitive style phenomena
are provided in the space below.
Myers-Briggs
conception of style is a rather popular. It is a revival of the idea of
psychological types of Karl Jung and temperament's types of Hippocrate,
Kretschmer and Adler. The main dispositions of the Myers-Briggs styles
are Extraversion/Introversion, Sensing/Intuition, Thinking/Feeling, and
Judging/Perceiving. The Myers-Briggs Inventory distinguishes 16 patterns
of action.
Kersey
on the line of the same theoretical perspective identified by the Temperament
Sorter 32 mixed types, which are clustered to four temperament types.
Metaphorically, they sound like Appolo, Dionysus, Prometheus, and Epimetheus.
Sternberg
introduced the cognitive construct of thinking styles as an intersection
between intelligence and personality. Thinking style is not ability, but
rather a preferred way of expressing or using one or more abilities. People
may have same level of ability, but to be very different in styles. Sternberg
developed the self-government theory, which represents the theoretical
background of the styles. He uses the metaphor of the government conducting
style in intention to describe what the thinking styles are about. The
assumption behind this classification is that the styles of government
are external reflection of the styles in the mind. The theory tries to
deal with the functions, forms, levels, scope and leanings of government
as applied to the individual. According to function criteria the thinking
styles are legislative, executive and judical. The forms are monarchic,
hierarchic, oligarchic and anarchic. Government functions at multiple
levels are federal, state, country, city, and so on, but they can be reduced
to more global categories - global and local. The correspondence levels
of mind are also global and local. Depending on the scope, the
mind styles are internal and external. The leanings of mental self-government
are conservative and progressive.
Rayner and Riding proposed an integration of style models
into two cognitive style families - the Wholist-Analytic and the Verbaliser-Imager.
In the former they included the styles like Field Dependency/Field Independency
(Witkin et al), Impulsivity/Reflectivity (Kagan at al), Convergent/Divergent
(Guilford), Holist/Serialist (Pask and Skott), The Style Delineator (Gregoric),
Assimilator/Explorer (Kaufmann), Adaptor/Innovator
(Kirton), Cognitive Style Index (Allinson & Hayes). The very representative
of the Verbaliser-Imager cognitive style family is Verbaliser/Visualiser
style (Paivio).
You also might meet the classification that distinguishes
between cognitive controls and cognitive styles (Jonassen and Grabowski).
Cognitive controls have different theoretical principles and assumptions
than cognitive styles. Cognitive control represents the level of individual
differences, which come about between ability and cognitive style and
therefore shares the characteristics of both. Cognitive controls are concerned
with manner and mode of learning, like cognitive styles, not with content,
like abilities. They are controlling as cognitive styles, but are not
enabling, like abilities. Cognitive controls are unipolar and value directed,
like ability and unlike cognitive styles.
back to top
|