Li-fang Zhang

Are Learning Approaches and Thinking Styles Related? A Study in Two Chinese Populations

Abstract This article presents the results of an investigation of the construct validity of J. B. Biggss (1987) theory of learning approaches and of R. J. Sternbergs (1988) theory of thinking styles in two Chinese populations. The study is also an examination of the nature of the relations between the two theories. University students from Hong Kong (n = 854) and from Nanjing, mainland China (n = 215), completed the Study Process Questionnaire (J. B. Biggs, 1992) and the Thinking Styles Inventory (R. J. Sternberg & R. K. Wagner, 1992). Results indicated that both inventories were reliable and valid for assessing the constructs underlying their respective theories among both Hong Kong and Nanjing university students. Results also showed that the learning approaches and thinking styles are related in the hypothesized ways: The surface approach was hypothesized to be positively and significantly correlated with styles associated with less complexity, and negatively and significantly correlated with the legislative, judicial, liberal, and hierarchical styles. The deep approach was hypothesized to be positively and significantly correlated with styles associated with more complexity, and negatively and significantly correlated with the executive, conservative, local, and monarchic styles. Implications of these relations are discussed.

Styles of Learning and Thinking Matter in Instruction and Assessment

There are two styles of learning and thinking: ability based and personality based. The former are assessed by maximum-performance tests, and the latter are assessed by typical-performance tests. We argue that both kinds of styles matter for instruction and assessment in school. In particular, shaping lessons based on an awareness that people learn and think in different ways can lead to improved instructional outcomes. We describe one ability-based theory and one personality-based theory and present supporting data from multiple studies relevant to each.

Thinking styles and cognitive development.

Abstract Using R. J. Sternbergs (1988, 1997) theory of thinking styles and W. G. Perrys (1970) theory of cognitive development, the author investigated the nature of thinking styles as they relate to cognitive development. Eighty-two Hong Kong university students (44 male, 38 female) responded to the Thinking Styles Inventory (R. J. Sternberg & R. K. Wagner, 1992) and the Zhang Cognitive Development Inventory (L. F. Zhang, 1997). Statistical analyses provided varying degrees of support for the prediction of an overlap between the thinking style and cognitive development constructs. In general, students who reasoned at a higher cognitive developmental level tended to use a wider range of thinking styles than students who reasoned at a lower cognitive developmental level. Implications of results are discussed in relation to education and research.

Further cross-cultural validation of the theory of mental self-government.

This study was designed to achieve two objectives. The 1st was to investigate the cross-cultural validity of the Thinking Styles Inventory (TSI; R. J. Sternberg & R. K. Wagner, 1992), which is based on the theory of mental self-government (R. J. Sternberg, 1988, 1990, 1997). The 2nd was to examine the relationships between thinking styles as assessed by the TSI and a number of student characteristics, including age, gender, college class level, work experience, and travel experience. One hundred fifty-one students from the University of Hong Kong participated in the study. Results indicated that the thinking styles evaluated by the TSI could be identified among the participants. Moreover, there were significant relationships between certain thinking styles, especially creativity-relevant styles and 3 student characteristics: age, work experience, and travel experience. Implications of these findings for teaching and learning in and outside the classroom are discussed.

Are Thinking Styles and Personality Types Related

The relationship between thinking styles and personality types is investigated within the contexts of Sternbergs theory of mental self-government and Hollands theory of personality types. A total of 600 university students from Hong Kong responded to the Thinking Styles Inventory (TSI) and the Short-version Self-directed Search (SVSDS) that was specially designed for the present study. A major finding of this study is that thinking styles and personality types overlap to a degree. A secondary finding is that the SVSDS is sufficiently reliable and valid for assessing Hollands personality types. Implications of both findings are discussed.

Assessing Thinking Styles in the Theory of Mental Self-Government: A Hong Kong Validity Study

The purpose of this study was to examine the appropriateness in a non-Western context of the Thinking Styles Inventory and Sternbergs underlying theory of mental self-government. The way to achieve this goal was through analyzing data collected from 88 Hong Kong postsecondary students. The results indicated that the scales were reasonably reliable, and factor analysis of the scales was fairly encouraging. The discrepancy found in the number of dimensions of thinking between the current study and what underlies the inventory may represent the participants being ‘tested’ in their second language. The theorys underlying assumptions that thinking styles are socialized and that developmental changes in stylistic preference should show significant effects of age and college class were supported by group differences in certain thinking styles on such variables as sex, college major, subject area taught, age, and college class.

Thinking Styles and the Big Five Personality Traits

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the relationship between thinking styles and the big five personality traits. One-hundred-and-fifty-four (mean age 20 years) second-year university students from Hong Kong participated in the study. Participants responded to the Thinking Styles Inventory based on Sternbergs theory of mental self-government and to the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI, Costa & McCare, 1992). Although significant relationships were identified between particular thinking styles and certain personality traits, it was concluded that it is premature to claim that a personality measure, such as the NEO-FFI can be used to measure thinking styles.

Measuring thinking styles in addition to measuring personality traits

Abstract This paper intends to join the long-standing debate regarding thinking styles and personality traits—should thinking styles be measured in addition to the measurement of personality traits? The means to achieve this goal was to provide empirical evidence as well as to review other studies in the literature. The Thinking Styles Inventory and the NEO Five-Factor Inventory were administered to 267 (67 male and 200 female) students from a large research university in Beijing, Peoples Republic of China. Results showed that thinking styles and personality traits statistically overlap. However, this overlap is limited. Two major arguments are made. First, thinking styles make a unique contribution to the understanding of human individual differences. Second, the necessity for measuring thinking styles apart from measuring personality traits depends on who uses the inventories and for what purposes.

Relationship between Thinking Styles Inventory and Study Process Questionnaire

Abstract This study investigated further the relationship between thinking styles as defined by Sternbergs theory of mental self-government and learning approaches as defined by Biggss model of student learning. Participants were two independent groups of American university students ( N 1 =67, N 2 =65 ). Participants responded to the Thinking Styles Inventory and the Study Process Questionnaire. It was found that the two inventories generally were correlated in predictable ways. This finding confirmed the one obtained in an early study of two Chinese populations.

Contributions of Thinking Styles to Critical Thinking Dispositions

Abstract The main purpose of the authors research was to investigate whether thinking styles significantly contribute to critical thinking dispositions. Two samples of Chinese university students, one from Beijing and the other from Nanjing, participated in the study. The participants responded to the Thinking Styles Inventory (R. J. Sternberg & R. K. Wagner, 1992) based on Sternbergs theory of mental self-government and to the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (P. Facione & N. Facione, 1992), which assessed the 7 dimensions of the critical thinking construct as defined in The Delphi Report (see P. Facione, N. Facione, & C. Giancarlo, 2001). Results from both samples supported the prediction that thinking styles statistically contribute to individual differences in critical thinking dispositions. These findings have implications not only for classroom instruction and assessment but also for academic and nonacademic program development.